PDA

View Full Version : Man-Made Climate Change: Issues and debates



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 [20] 21 22 23 24 25 26

Ian Murray
21-09-2019, 09:30 AM
Young children don't need to told much about global heating. But teenage children will learn about it at school, so the parents should definitely be talking about it with them. If they are living in Australia, the effects of global heating are constantly in the news during summer, so it's hard to avoid.

U.S. Teens Have a Mix of Emotions About Climate Change (https://www.statista.com/chart/19427/teens-opinion-climate-change/)
Statista
20.9.19

...Teenagers and school-age children are stepping up, organizing, leading the protests. Many young people report feeling overwhelmed by the prospect of dealing with the current and future repercussions of climate change. The Washington Post and Kaiser Family Foundation found that 57 percent of U.S. teens are afraid of climate change. Nearly the same share of teens feels motivated by climate change. Only one in five teens reported being uninterested in climate change.

Capablanca-Fan
21-09-2019, 10:26 AM
Capitalism Is the Key to Fixing Climate Change (https://reason.com/2019/09/20/capitalism-is-the-key-to-fixing-climate-change)
Slowing or stopping economic growth will only delay solving the problems caused by man-made warming.
RONALD BAILEY, Reason, 20 Sep 2019

Economic growth initially hurts the environment, but after a point it makes things cleaner. By then, slowing or stopping economic growth will delay environmental improvement, including efforts to mitigate the problem of man-made global warming.

The MIT economist Andrew McAfee explains the process in a forthcoming book, More from Less:


We have finally learned how to tread more lightly on our planet….In America—a large rich country that accounts for about 25 percent of the global economy—we're now generally using less for most resources year after year, even as our economy and population continue to grow. What's more, we're also polluting the air and water less, emitting fewer greenhouse gases, and seeing population increases in many animals that had almost vanished. America, in short, is post-peak in its exploitation of the earth. The situation is similar in many other rich countries, and even developing countries such as China are now taking better care of the planet in important ways.


How did this happen? Through more capitalism, not less:


The strangest aspect of the story is that we didn't make any radical course changes to eliminate the trade-off between human prosperity and planetary health. Instead, we just got a lot better at doing things we'd already been doing. In particular, we got better at combining technological progress with capitalism to satisfy human wants and needs.


McAfee's book documents how technological progress spurred by market competition is dematerializing the economy. McAfee makes a strong case that climate change is an open-access commons problem that markets can dematerialize once a price is put on greenhouse gas emissions.

antichrist
21-09-2019, 10:37 AM
Capitalism Is the Key to Fixing Climate Change (https://reason.com/2019/09/20/capitalism-is-the-key-to-fixing-climate-change)
Slowing or stopping economic growth will only delay solving the problems caused by man-made warming.
RONALD BAILEY, Reason, 20 Sep 2019

Economic growth initially hurts the environment, but after a point it makes things cleaner. By then, slowing or stopping economic growth will delay environmental improvement, including efforts to mitigate the problem of man-made global warming.

The MIT economist Andrew McAfee explains the process in a forthcoming book, More from Less:


We have finally learned how to tread more lightly on our planet….In America—a large rich country that accounts for about 25 percent of the global economy—we're now generally using less for most resources year after year, even as our economy and population continue to grow. What's more, we're also polluting the air and water less, emitting fewer greenhouse gases, and seeing population increases in many animals that had almost vanished. America, in short, is post-peak in its exploitation of the earth. The situation is similar in many other rich countries, and even developing countries such as China are now taking better care of the planet in important ways.


How did this happen? Through more capitalism, not less:


The strangest aspect of the story is that we didn't make any radical course changes to eliminate the trade-off between human prosperity and planetary health. Instead, we just got a lot better at doing things we'd already been doing. In particular, we got better at combining technological progress with capitalism to satisfy human wants and needs.


McAfee's book documents how technological progress spurred by market competition is dematerializing the economy. McAfee makes a strong case that climate change is an open-access commons problem that markets can dematerialize once a price is put on greenhouse gas emissions.


But Obama legislation that led and compelled many of these good results are being demolished by the Anti-Christ who took Obama's place. The Christians support Trump in spite of him wiping out legislation that was preventing wiping out of God-created unique creatures - I can't see through the haze.

Patrick Byrom
21-09-2019, 11:02 AM
No need to avoid...good to know whats going on in the world...if parents take it with sarcasm...kids are less likely to see it as a dramaYour friends are sarcastic about the death and destruction caused by bushfires in Australia?

Patrick Byrom
21-09-2019, 11:14 AM
Capitalism Is the Key to Fixing Climate Change (https://reason.com/2019/09/20/capitalism-is-the-key-to-fixing-climate-change) Slowing or stopping economic growth will only delay solving the problems caused by man-made warming. RONALD BAILEY, Reason, 20 Sep 2019

McAfee's book documents how technological progress spurred by market competition is dematerializing the economy. McAfee makes a strong case that climate change is an open-access commons problem that markets can dematerialize once a price is put on greenhouse gas emissions.
…Once the government puts a price on greenhouse gas emissions, you mean! But I completely agree with this. So do Labor and the Democrats - it's the Coalition and the Republicans that are standing in the way.

ER
21-09-2019, 12:10 PM
Of course it is more harmful because without stupidity you can't have man made global warming and it's denial. Without stupidity you can't have immorality. The problem is that some humans believe we are above nature and not part of it. I don't understand how chess players can be so concerned whether P-e4 or P-e3 but so unconcerned whether temperature +1 or +2. That's it, to encourage understanding we need chess boards that the squares towards the hot centre of the board graduate to a hot red colour. That unfortunately I cannot demonstrate here. The concept could be called Climate Change for Chess Dummies

You are spot on here! You should hear the Berlin World Cup GMs commentary about climate demonstrations in Europe! They fit your description (re relating chess players vs social and natural phenomena around them) 100%! :D :P

ER
21-09-2019, 12:17 PM
Your friends are sarcastic about the death and destruction caused by bushfires in Australia?

Hey Michael, don't worry about hair pulling, bra burning ranting of local Cassandras! :D :P
Your friends know very well that bushfires caused by natives in order to clear millions of hectares of forests for hunting purposes (*) leave for "dead"
modern catastrophes, which can be tackled by modern technology anyway, saving land and people from complete destruction!
(*) and that's on a continuous uninterrupted basis over tens of thousands of years!

Patrick Byrom
21-09-2019, 12:55 PM
Hey Michael, don't worry about hair pulling, bra burning ranting of local Cassandras! :D :P
Your friends know very well that bushfires caused by natives in order to clear millions of hectares of forests for hunting purposes (*) leave for "dead"
modern catastrophes, which can be tackled by modern technology anyway, saving land and people from complete destruction!
(*) and that's on a continuous uninterrupted basis for tens of thousands of years!Hopefully Michael's friends - or at least their children - are aware that bushfires are still killing people and destroying homes in 2019. And that the CSIRO has warned us that they will get worse in the future.

ER
21-09-2019, 01:53 PM
Hopefully Michael's friends - or at least their children - are aware that bushfires are still killing people and destroying homes in 2019. And that the CSIRO has warned us that they will get worse in the future.

haha, forget my son, he's worse than me - he is an indifferent bloody fence sitting bastard! my (ex) wife same, all she does is potato couching watching stupid American series with her knucklehead Yankee friends. Worst of all is my granddaughter who agitates and bullies boys and girls in school and Sunday school, (she just goes there on Sundays to cause trouble) enforcing her classmates to join silly climate rallies and she's not even 13 yet. What's the world coming to!!! I hope they kick her out of there and send her back to Australia, that will teach her!!!

antichrist
21-09-2019, 04:09 PM
haha, forget my son, he's worse than me - he is an indifferent bloody fence sitting bastard! my (ex) wife same, all she does is potato couching watching stupid American series with her knucklehead Yankee friends. Worst of all is my granddaughter who agitates and bullies boys and girls in school and Sunday school, (she just goes there on Sundays to cause trouble) enforcing her classmates to join silly climate rallies and she's not even 13 yet. What's the world coming to!!! I hope they kick her out of there and send her back to Australia, that will teach her!!!

I must have married same as myself and different to you. My couple exs whom I happen to be still close to are all on board re progressive issues. In 1970 number 1 was already good on gay. Also she refused to work in the X-Ray dept of the hospital claiming that was for nurses who had already finished having children - so she was good on anti-nuke with me, even coming to Canberra protest and camping out on Parliament House lawns in 1976. I think my current would shoot The Donald if she was in range or at least kick him where his mother never kissed him. I love that your grand daughter grows hair on her chest - fighting for her future right for a healthy biosphere.

Ian Murray
21-09-2019, 05:41 PM
Hopefully Michael's friends - or at least their children - are aware that bushfires are still killing people and destroying homes in 2019. And that the CSIRO has warned us that they will get worse in the future.

When our planet is under attack we have to stand up and fight back (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/sep/20/when-our-planet-is-under-attack-we-have-to-stand-up-and-fight-back?utm_term=RWRpdG9yaWFsX0d1YXJkaWFuVG9kYXlBVVMt MTkwOTIx&utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GuardianTodayAUS&CMP=GTAU_email)
The Guardian op-ed
20.9.19

Until a few months ago I never imagined blocking a bridge and watching grandparents being carried off by police.

Yet last weekend I was one of hundreds of Extinction Rebellion (XR for short) protesters who danced, sang and chanted on Princes bridge in Melbourne for several hours to draw attention to the climate crisis. The people who chose to be arrested (the police gave protesters plenty of warning and time to move on) included an assistant school principal, a clinical psychologist, a permaculturalist and a 73-year-old grandmother.

These are not the sort of activities I envisioned doing at this point in my life. In the words of that Powderfinger song, these days turned out nothing like I had planned. Then again, few people predicted the world would end up the way it has – other than climate scientists, of course, whose warnings have been ignored for decades....

Ian Murray
21-09-2019, 06:22 PM
Subsidy-free renewable energy development undercuts arguments for new fossil fuel generation (http://ieefa.org/subsidy-free-renewable-energy-development-undercuts-arguments-for-new-fossil-fuel-generation/)
IEEFA
19.9.19

... As wind and solar demonstrate they can compete on their own against coal- and natural gas-fired plants, the economic and political arguments in favor of carbon-free power become harder and harder to refute.

“The training wheels are off,” said Joe Osha, an equity analyst at JMP Securities. “Prices have declined enough for both solar and wind that there’s a path toward continued deployment in a post-subsidy world.”

The reason, in short, is the subsidies worked. After decades of quotas, tax breaks and feed-in-tariffs, wind and solar have been deployed widely enough for manufacturers and developers to become increasingly efficient and drive down costs. The cost of wind power has fallen about 50% since 2010. Solar has dropped 85%. That makes them cheaper than new coal and gas plants in two-thirds of the world, according to BloombergNEF.

MichaelBaron
21-09-2019, 08:20 PM
Hopefully Michael's friends - or at least their children - are aware that bushfires are still killing people and destroying homes in 2019. And that the CSIRO has warned us that they will get worse in the future.

My friends and their children are not starting fires. Furthermore, we do not go hunting/gathering....we have other activities to attend to :).
Am I correct to assume that natives start the bushfires on purpose sometimes?

MichaelBaron
21-09-2019, 08:22 PM
My friends and their children are not starting fires. Furthermore, we do not go hunting/gathering....we have other activities to attend to :).
Am I correct to assume that natives start the bushfires on purpose sometimes?

https://landcareaustralia.org.au/project/traditional-aboriginal-burning-modern-day-land-management/
Why do we need farms and technology...lets all go back to indigenous ways.

Patrick Byrom
21-09-2019, 08:45 PM
My friends and their children are not starting fires. Furthermore, we do not go hunting/gathering....we have other activities to attend to :). Am I correct to assume that natives start the bushfires on purpose sometimes?I've no idea what you're talking about. Most bushfires are either accidents or have natural causes. But the hot dry weather caused by global heating makes them worse.

MichaelBaron
21-09-2019, 09:40 PM
When our planet is under attack we have to stand up and fight back (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/sep/20/when-our-planet-is-under-attack-we-have-to-stand-up-and-fight-back?utm_term=RWRpdG9yaWFsX0d1YXJkaWFuVG9kYXlBVVMt MTkwOTIx&utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GuardianTodayAUS&CMP=GTAU_email)
The Guardian op-ed
20.9.19

Until a few months ago I never imagined blocking a bridge and watching grandparents being carried off by police.

Yet last weekend I was one of hundreds of Extinction Rebellion (XR for short) protesters who danced, sang and chanted on Princes bridge in Melbourne for several hours to draw attention to the climate crisis. The people who chose to be arrested (the police gave protesters plenty of warning and time to move on) included an assistant school principal, a clinical psychologist, a permaculturalist and a 73-year-old grandmother.

These are not the sort of activities I envisioned doing at this point in my life. In the words of that Powderfinger song, these days turned out nothing like I had planned. Then again, few people predicted the world would end up the way it has – other than climate scientists, of course, whose warnings have been ignored for decades....

I would expect grandparents not to commit actions that result in being carried off. Shall we blame the police?

antichrist
22-09-2019, 12:10 AM
https://landcareaustralia.org.au/project/traditional-aboriginal-burning-modern-day-land-management/
Why do we need farms and technology...lets all go back to indigenous ways.

With your attitude of head in sand to climate change your mentality have never left your perceived idea of indigenous ways. The only difference is that you can look with hindsight and should know better whereas they could not - at least not in the very long term. Some people may consider your existence as an disadvantage to us all.

MichaelBaron
22-09-2019, 02:12 AM
With your attitude of head in sand to climate change your mentality have never left your perceived idea of indigenous ways. The only difference is that you can look with hindsight and should know better whereas they could not - at least not in the very long term. Some people may consider your existence as an disadvantage to us all.

People can consider my existence a disadvantage - not a problem! I am not asking them to provide for me. They are entitled to their opinions. But then they should not expect me to provide for them either :)

antichrist
22-09-2019, 07:57 AM
My friends and their children are not starting fires. Furthermore, we do not go hunting/gathering....we have other activities to attend to :).
Am I correct to assume that natives start the bushfires on purpose sometimes?

Michael, current society is doing worse than bushfires. Our usage of oil is carbon monoxide not carbon dioxide so a little more dangerous I believe. Also we know climate science and pollution science and know the damage we are doing. Native peoples did not know about green house nor should we expect them to. Why we are even more worse because we could substantially decrease such usage and over time eliminate altogether but we don't really care. We don't deserve our planet. I can't believe that such educated people on this board can be no better than Pauline Hanson - she has an excuse lack of full education. Of course not everybody is suitable for higher education so those who are should be aware of their responsibilities - not to appeal to ordinary people's lower tinderies. That was the difference of Obama over Trump. Of Whitlam and Rudd over Howard and Abbott.

antichrist
22-09-2019, 08:01 AM
People can consider my existence a disadvantage - not a problem! I am not asking them to provide for me. They are entitled to their opinions. But then they should not expect me to provide for them either :)

That does not give you the right to stuff up their planet. It is not about money you are not in the welfare spending thread. Your attitude to climate change is like in a drought of someone leaving the tap on all day and night just because you pay your water bill thinking everything is just about money. Money has only been in existence for only a relatively short period of man's existence and I believe that man will be a lot better off when money is no longer in existence.

Ian Murray
22-09-2019, 09:32 AM
https://landcareaustralia.org.au/project/traditional-aboriginal-burning-modern-day-land-management/
Why do we need farms and technology...lets all go back to indigenous ways.

The aborigines had a long time to learn how to manage the land, including regular firestick clearing to renew the soil. White settlers ignored local knowledge and created wasteland.

Ian Murray
22-09-2019, 09:37 AM
I would expect grandparents not to commit actions that result in being carried off. Shall we blame the police?


I'm a grandparent, and an activist. Age does not prevent caring.

The police handled the Princes Bridge demo very well, giving plenty of warning before making arrests. Those remaining after the warnings chose to face arrest, in protest against climate inaction. There was no violence.

MichaelBaron
22-09-2019, 11:14 AM
That does not give you the right to stuff up their planet. It is not about money you are not in the welfare spending thread. Your attitude to climate change is like in a drought of someone leaving the tap on all day and night just because you pay your water bill thinking everything is just about money. Money has only been in existence for only a relatively short period of man's existence and I believe that man will be a lot better off when money is no longer in existence.

I am not ''stuffing up the planet''. I doubt that I consume more energy than others or require more oxygen. However, I refuse to:

a)disrupt lives of people around me just because I want to protest
b) award assignment marks to students for attending rallies and protests as opposed for the work done.
c) If money would not exist, some other form of payment reward would exist...but then again...we can try to go back to the Stone age (in case you want to) and see what happens.


And yes, I pay my water bill and think about money, and think that I earned it. It is more responsible than claiming that I am entitled to water by the right of birth (or entitled to land because some spirits live there :)).

MichaelBaron
22-09-2019, 11:16 AM
The aborigines had a long time to learn how to manage the land, including regular firestick clearing to renew the soil. White settlers ignored local knowledge and created wasteland.

So those who choose to can surely go back to Indigenous way of farming...somehow contemporary farmers do not like the idea. But again - I believe Queensland is the farming state...so may be some will try :)

MichaelBaron
22-09-2019, 11:17 AM
I'm a grandparent, and an activist. Age does not prevent caring.

The police handled the Princes Bridge demo very well, giving plenty of warning before making arrests. Those remaining after the warnings chose to face arrest, in protest against climate inaction. There was no violence.

You can be grandparent and activist and stand for what you believe in. Just do not block bridges that I use for travelling please :). Good that you agreed that police was right to ''carry them off''

antichrist
22-09-2019, 12:24 PM
I am not ''stuffing up the planet''. I doubt that I consume more energy than others or require more oxygen. However, I refuse to:

a)disrupt lives of people around me just because I want to protest
b) award assignment marks to students for attending rallies and protests as opposed for the work done.
c) If money would not exist, some other form of payment reward would exist...but then again...we can try to go back to the Stone age (in case you want to) and see what happens.


And yes, I pay my water bill and think about money, and think that I earned it. It is more responsible than claiming that I am entitled to water by the right of birth (or entitled to land because some spirits live there :)).

You may not consume more energy than average but that average is still destroying the balance in the atmosphere so you are part of the problem that other people have to attempt to repair. If you do nothing than other "clean" people have to consume your pollution though attempting to lead a clean life. You are disrupting their birthright so they can disrupt your life in return until the injustice is solved.


Because land is native land is sufficient to ensure their rights over it and cannot be morally stolen by force. If you agree that force can extinguish native rights that means that no country's boundaries are safe as might is right. Exactly Adolf's attitude and we all know what led to.

Ian Murray
22-09-2019, 01:26 PM
You can be grandparent and activist and stand for what you believe in. Just do not block bridges that I use for travelling please :). Good that you agreed that police was right to ''carry them off''

Sorry, get used to it. Disrupting traffic draws media and public attention; demonstrating quietly out of sight does not. Better to be inconvenienced now rather than scrabbling to survive later on a different planet (unrecognisable from the one we live on now).

MichaelBaron
22-09-2019, 01:30 PM
Sorry, get used to it. Disrupting traffic draws media and public attention; demonstrating quietly out of sight does not. Better to be inconvenienced now rather than scrabbling to survive later on a different planet (unrecognisable from the one we live on now).

Being inconvenience based on what you believe in...what if others believe in other things..shall they also take it to the street? Shall we have followers of Flying cookie monster also marching the streets of CBD?

antichrist
22-09-2019, 02:00 PM
Being inconvenience based on what you believe in...what if others believe in other things..shall they also take it to the street? Shall we have followers of Flying cookie monster also marching the streets of CBD?

There are a few annual religious parades that take place Sydney streets that block the traffic - to me they are no different to the Flying Cookie Monster

Patrick Byrom
22-09-2019, 02:04 PM
Being inconvenience based on what you believe in...what if others believe in other things..shall they also take it to the street? Shall we have followers of Flying cookie monster also marching the streets of CBD?It's not what we "believe" - it's what we know from the scientific evidence. And, in Australia, there are street marches for all sorts of reasons. Do you want to ban the Anzac Day marches?

Blunderbuss
22-09-2019, 11:59 PM
Sorry, get used to it. Disrupting traffic draws media and public attention; demonstrating quietly out of sight does not. Better to be inconvenienced now rather than scrabbling to survive later on a different planet (unrecognisable from the one we live on now).

:clap::clap::clap::clap:

https://melbourneactivistlegalsupport.org/2019/09/16/statement-of-concern-the-policing-of-extinction-rebellion/

MichaelBaron
23-09-2019, 04:08 AM
:clap::clap::clap::clap:

https://melbourneactivistlegalsupport.org/2019/09/16/statement-of-concern-the-policing-of-extinction-rebellion/

1. The police cordon prevented hundreds of supporters from joining the protest thereby limiting the right to peaceful assembly.

In other words...prevented them from disrupting other people's lives!

MichaelBaron
23-09-2019, 04:10 AM
It's not what we "believe" - it's what we know from the scientific evidence. And, in Australia, there are street marches for all sorts of reasons. Do you want to ban the Anzac Day marches?

Anzac Day is a public holiday. I believe the march is a legit way of celebrating. So Flying cookie monster supporters can not march? why not? Can Christians/Muslims protest?

Or yes...Anti china ones can...how about the Pro China ones?

MichaelBaron
23-09-2019, 04:11 AM
There are a few annual religious parades that take place Sydney streets that block the traffic - to me they are no different to the Flying Cookie Monster

Then flying cookie monster follows should be able to do it too

antichrist
23-09-2019, 06:18 AM
Then flying cookie monster follows should be able to do it too

I used to protest against the Christian protests with my 666 sign as shown in my picture here and got bashed sometimes. In Byron the Hari Krishnas used to march on the main street. I used to heckle them then they only do the footpath now?? If you can assure me that the Flying Cookie Monster's followers are not like the Christian thugs then maybe okay. I don't understand why the Monsters followers don't take flying lessons and do their climatic things in the heavens? Is there any chance of the Flying Monster colliding with Jesus? Are their sky rules about right of way? Could Jesus feed the monster to every one in Heaven? It is a big step from communion hosts to cookies!

Ian Murray
23-09-2019, 07:48 AM
1. The police cordon prevented hundreds of supporters from joining the protest thereby limiting the right to peaceful assembly.

In other words...prevented them from disrupting other people's lives!

Human rights override inconvenience to traffic. As your cited article says, "The right to peaceful assembly is protected at international law. In Victoria, the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic) ss15 and 16; expressly protects and promotes the rights to assembly and expression. Police cannot place restrictions to arbitrarily and discriminatorily intervene in protest"

Ian Murray
23-09-2019, 07:51 AM
Anzac Day is a public holiday. I believe the march is a legit way of celebrating. So Flying cookie monster supporters can not march? why not? Can Christians/Muslims protest?

Or yes...Anti china ones can...how about the Pro China ones?

They all enjoy freedom of expression and the right of assembly

ER
23-09-2019, 09:37 AM
Sorry, get used to it. Disrupting traffic draws media and public attention; demonstrating quietly out of sight does not. Better to be inconvenienced now rather than scrabbling to survive later on a different planet (unrecognisable from the one we live on now).

indoctrinating and encouraging school children into fanaticism and civil disobedience is bad news for democracy.
Disrupting traffic and causing big problems in holding back important services such as ambulance, fire brigade and police
does not win friends and supporters. It causes anger, indignation and rejection!
African gangs, Centrelink cheats, drug traffickers etc also draw media and public attention!
Does media exposure also promote their causes?

Blunderbuss
23-09-2019, 09:50 AM
African gangs, Centrelink cheats, drug traffickers etc also draw media and public attention!


What does this have to do with climate activism? Your views are perfectly summed up by this article Theres-no-populist-rightwing-breakout-in-Australia-because-the-government-already-accommodates-them (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/sep/23/theres-no-populist-rightwing-breakout-in-australia-because-the-government-already-accommodates-them)


Australia’s conservatives already offer enough of what the most reactionary social currents might want. Their policies tick all the right boxes – on race, gender and the environment – to an extent that leads mainstream Australian politicians, and their policies, to be praised by extremists around the world....

Peter Dutton recently described the children of a family facing deportation as “anchor babies” as he repeated his refusal to offer them asylum. But last year he floated the possibility of creating a special visa category for white South African farmers who have been the subject of “white genocide” myth-making in News Corp papers and bio-Nazi websites alike.

In his tenure as home affairs and immigration minister, Dutton has also chosen to weigh in on a moral panic about “African gangs” in Melbourne.



And just to keep us on topic the article finishes with


Until Friday, Australia seems to have been sleepwalking.

Has it finally woken up?

MichaelBaron
23-09-2019, 10:47 AM
indoctrinating and encouraging school children into fanaticism and public disobedience is bad news for democracy.
Disrupting traffic and causing big problems in holding back important services such as ambulance, fire brigade and police
does not win friends and supporters. It causes anger, indignation and rejection!
African gangs, Centrelink cheats, drug traffickers etc also draw media and public attention!
Does media exposure also promote their causes?
Exactly.
And this is kind of people that grows up as a result: https://www.facebook.com/realCandaceOwens/videos/475606813167514/UzpfSTIwNzQzNDAzNzI2MzA4ODQ6MjYyNTgyODk0MDgxNTM1NQ/

antichrist
23-09-2019, 10:56 AM
Exactly.
And this is kind of people that grows up as a result: https://www.facebook.com/realCandaceOwens/videos/475606813167514/UzpfSTIwNzQzNDAzNzI2MzA4ODQ6MjYyNTgyODk0MDgxNTM1NQ/

Us oldies have created the climate change situation yet we still have gall to knock the youngsters who have to fix up our mess that is almost impossible to do. It is shocking to have morals and to stand up for what their belief is that happens to be back up by science. Religious dogma is not backed up by science by nobody here knocks when they hold up the traffic.

Desmond
23-09-2019, 11:01 AM
Exactly.
And this is kind of people that grows up as a result:
People like:

'Responsibility to act': Aussie tech billionaire Mike Cannon-Brookes heads to UN climate summit (https://www.sbs.com.au/news/responsibility-to-act-aussie-tech-billionaire-mike-cannon-brookes-heads-to-un-climate-summit)

Patrick Byrom
23-09-2019, 12:24 PM
Anzac Day is a public holiday. I believe the march is a legit way of celebrating.But that march also disrupts traffic, and prevents people from getting to work. Isn't that what you're mainly concerned about?


So Flying cookie monster supporters can not march? why not? Can Christians/Muslims protest? Or yes...Anti china ones can...how about the Pro China ones?Of course they all can - I've already said that!

Patrick Byrom
23-09-2019, 12:32 PM
indoctrinating and encouraging school children into fanaticism and public disobedience is bad news for democracy.The only 'indoctrinating' that's being done is to teach children basic scientific facts. Once they understand the science, they will want to express their views - which is a fundamental part of democracy.

Disrupting traffic and causing big problems in holding back important services such as ambulance, fire brigade and police
does not win friends and supporters. It causes anger, indignation and rejection!Can you provide some evidence that emergency services were disrupted? And does this argument apply to every march?

Ian Murray
23-09-2019, 12:36 PM
indoctrinating and encouraging school children into fanaticism and public disobedience is bad news for democracy. ...


What rubbish. Democracy is founded on the right of the people to assert their views. And no-one has more right to protest over climate inaction than the young - it's their future at stake.

ER
23-09-2019, 02:11 PM
What rubbish. Democracy is founded on the right of the people to assert their views. And no-one has more right to protest over climate inaction than the young - it's their future at stake.

absolute bollocks! child indoctrination leads to Stalinism, maybe your idea of democracy!

ER
23-09-2019, 02:19 PM
The only 'indoctrinating' that's being done is to teach children basic scientific facts. Once they understand the science, they will want to express their views - which is a fundamental part of democracy.
Can you provide some evidence that emergency services were disrupted? And does this argument apply to every march?
the only indoctrination that's been done is encouraging children to public disobedience.

Can you provide some evidence that emergency services were disrupted?
Who the hell do you think you are to demand "evidence" from others, a residential judge, or Beria type interrogator or something? Go jump! as almost 40 arrests for disrupting
traffic the other day weren't enough to clear your eyes (forget about your brain)!

ER
23-09-2019, 02:22 PM
What does this have to do with climate activism? Your views are perfectly summed up by this article (blah blah)

and yours are perfectly summed up by some commo manifesto!

Blunderbuss
23-09-2019, 02:43 PM
The reason the young (and the not so young - twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1175711161343459330 (https://twitter.com/Channel4News/status/1175711161343459330)) are taking to the streets is this: Climate change: Impacts 'accelerating' (https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-49773869)

ER
23-09-2019, 03:01 PM
Us oldies have created the climate change situation yet we still have gall to knock the youngsters who have to fix up our mess that is almost impossible to do. It is shocking to have morals and to stand up for what their belief is that happens to be back up by science. Religious dogma is not backed up by science by nobody here knocks when they hold up the traffic.

us oldies held the flag high by demonstrating against the war in Vietnam, fun hurling objects and abuse at the cops and who was the Yankee poly who visited Auz at the time. Today's youth are pansies not giving a stuff about
real issues such as drugs, child and women abuse, high cost of living. All they care is to take a day off (A Friday mind you = long weekend) so they can go down town and disrupt traffic and vital services! Do that here in New York City and you are in big trouble. They protested in the footpaths around the nice and quiet Columbus Circle and had picnics across the road in Central Park when it was over!

Patrick Byrom
23-09-2019, 03:23 PM
us oldies held the flag high by demonstrating against the war in Vietnam, fun hurling objects and abuse at the cops and who was the Yankee poly who visited Auz at the time. Today's youth are pansies not giving a stuff about real issues such as drugs, child and women abuse, high cost of living. All they care is to take a day off (A Friday mind you = long weekend) so they can go down town and disrupt traffic and vital services! Do that here in New York City and you are in big trouble. They protested in the footpaths around the nice and quiet Columbus Circle and had picnics across the road in Central Park when it was over!Umm ... global heating is a real issue. It increases the risk of fires - as Qld firefighters are pointing out (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/sep/22/queensland-bushfires-extreme-season-now-the-new-normal) - as well as making droughts and cyclones worse.

Patrick Byrom
23-09-2019, 03:29 PM
Who the hell do you think you are to demand "evidence" from others, a residential judge, or Beria type interrogator or something? Go jump! as almost 40 arrests for disrupting traffic the other day weren't enough to clear your eyes (forget about your brain)!Disrupting traffic is not the same as disrupting emergency services, which is what you claimed. But if you can't provide evidence that emergency services were disrupted, I'll assume that they weren't.

And, of course, any march disrupts traffic, as I've already explained to Michael.

antichrist
23-09-2019, 04:57 PM
I consider that because the protestors are holding up traffic it is a direct hit on the people and engines causing the pollution. I know more pollution will be caused by the extra idling and slow moving of vehicles but maybe just the drivers may also consider the unnecessary pollution (via the system) they are causing.

Ian Murray
23-09-2019, 05:31 PM
absolute bollocks! child indoctrination leads to Stalinism, maybe your idea of democracy!

Your obsession with Stalinism may be the cause of your confusion. The Princes Bridge demo on Sep 14 was hosted by Extinction Rebellion (https://rebellion.earth). The School Strike for Climate (https://www.schoolstrike4climate.com/) was held at Treasury Gardens on Sep 20.

ER
23-09-2019, 06:57 PM
Your obsession with Stalinism may be the cause of your confusion. The Princes Bridge demo on Sep 14 was hosted by Extinction Rebellion (https://rebellion.earth). The School Strike for Climate (https://www.schoolstrike4climate.com/) was held at Treasury Gardens on Sep 20.

Hardly an obsession since I can't recall having used the term (although tempted :D ) before. judging from your delirious response I must have hit a nerve though! :D :P


Extinction Rebellion … School Strike for Climate with all due respect same crap different colour! :D

Ian Murray
23-09-2019, 08:20 PM
Hardly an obsession since I can't recall having used the term (although tempted :D ) before. judging from your delirious response I must have hit a nerve though! :D :P

with all due respect same crap different colour! :D

:)

3887

MichaelBaron
23-09-2019, 09:04 PM
So I am curious those who ''take it to the streets'' do they on average consume less energy than I do? Have kids dropped their smartphones? taking shower in rain water?

MichaelBaron
23-09-2019, 09:06 PM
:)

3887

So any comments on RMIT university lecturer awarding marks for attending the rally?

ER
23-09-2019, 09:11 PM
So any comments on RMIT university lecturer awarding marks for attending the rally?

LOL not sure about the marks awarded by the RMIT Uni Lecturer, the ones here got (ear) marked that's for sure though! :D :P

3888

Patrick Byrom
23-09-2019, 10:12 PM
So I am curious those who ''take it to the streets'' do they on average consume less energy than I do? Have kids dropped their smartphones? taking shower in rain water?Smartphones consume almost no energy. Not sure what rainwater has to do with energy consumption.

ER
23-09-2019, 11:53 PM
https://www.weeklytimesnow.com.au/news/national/peter-ridd-raises-85000-in-a-day-to-fight-jcu-legal-battle/video/5e96ac108fddc79b2f57f09e228eb4af

and

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/climate-dismissal-an-insult-to-everybody/ar-AAHIJCY?ocid=spartanntp

James Cook University appeals academic Peter Ridd's dismissal compensation decision. Handle this with care!

Ian Murray
24-09-2019, 08:37 AM
So I am curious those who ''take it to the streets'' do they on average consume less energy than I do? Have kids dropped their smartphones? taking shower in rain water?

Well, my home has solar power and a rainwater tank. Does yours?

antichrist
24-09-2019, 09:28 AM
So I am curious those who ''take it to the streets'' do they on average consume less energy than I do? Have kids dropped their smartphones? taking shower in rain water?

Michael, you are top on one index - so far your lack of breeding along with many other chess champions. If only both attributes were contagious.

Ian Murray
24-09-2019, 09:40 AM
Jewish climate protestors at Melbourne rally, Sep 20


https://youtu.be/5--V1JQUXuE

ER
24-09-2019, 11:37 AM
https://www.weeklytimesnow.com.au/news/national/peter-ridd-raises-85000-in-a-day-to-fight-jcu-legal-battle/video/5e96ac108fddc79b2f57f09e228eb4af

and

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/climate-dismissal-an-insult-to-everybody/ar-AAHIJCY?ocid=spartanntp

James Cook University appeals academic Peter Ridd's dismissal compensation decision. Handle this with care!

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/commentary/aunty-complains-about-a-lack-of-alternative-views-thats-a-bit-rich/news-story/7ea760766ac998adb783698635f1bbd0

Aunty biased? c' mon! :D


Originally Posted by MichaelBaron
So any comments on RMIT university lecturer awarding marks for attending the rally?

well maybe he followed orders from the above!

You don't want him to end up like professor Peter Ridd now do you??? :D :P

Patrick Byrom
24-09-2019, 02:46 PM
Michael, you are top on one index - so far your lack of breeding along with many other chess champions. If only both attributes were contagious.I don't think you meant to put it quite like that :)
And while not breeding may not be contagious, it's definitely hereditary!

Ian Murray
24-09-2019, 03:59 PM
State Liberal governments can be progressive and green also. It's the Federal Coalition holding us back.

South Australia unveils plans for 100% renewable hydrogen economy (https://reneweconomy.com.au/south-australia-unveils-plans-for-100-renewable-hydrogen-economy-58723/)
Renew Economy
24.9.19

South Australia has outlined plans for a 100 per cent renewable hydrogen economy, saying that its enormous wind and solar resources, saying there is nowhere else in the world as well positioned to produce, consume and export 100% green hydrogen.

The plan was unveiled at an international hydrogen conference that began in Adelaide on Tuesday, in a state that is already sourcing well over 50 per cent of its electricity needs from wind and solar and which is on track to reach “net 100 per cent renewables” before 2030 and go well beyond that in the following decade.

Just last week, the Germany-Australian Energy Transition Hub talked of “200 per cent renewables” as the most economic and effective plan to provide renewable power for electricity, transport and buildings, and to build an export industry. It seems South Australia will inevitably be the first to get there....

ER
24-09-2019, 05:02 PM
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/commentary/aunty-complains-about-a-lack-of-alternative-views-thats-a-bit-rich/news-story/7ea760766ac998adb783698635f1bbd0

Aunty biased? c' mon! :D



well maybe he followed orders from the above!

You don't want him to end up like professor Peter Ridd now do you??? :D :P

It's gotta be a first, I mean indoctrinating uni students and then awarding them marks for attending civil disobedience mob gatherings!!

antichrist
24-09-2019, 07:04 PM
I don't think you meant to put it quite like that :)
And while not breeding may not be contagious, it's definitely hereditary!

Actually it could be interpreted in a few funny ways.

All in the context of course that the lesser population all the better for planet Earth presumably.

Ian Murray
24-09-2019, 07:48 PM
Why is Greta Thunberg so triggering for certain men? (https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/why-is-greta-thunberg-so-triggering-for-certain-men-1.4002264)
How can a 16-year-old girl in plaits, dedicated to trying to save the planet, inspire such incandescent rage?
Irish Times
7.9.19

...Part of the reason she inspires such rage, of course, is blindingly obvious. Climate change is terrifying. The Amazon is burning. So too is the Savannah. Parts of the Arctic are on fire. Sea levels are rising. There are more vicious storms and wildfires and droughts and floods. Denial is easier than confronting the terrifying truth....

But who’s the real freak – the activist whose determination has single-handedly started a powerful global movement for change, or the middle-aged man taunting a child with Asperger syndrome from behind the safety of their computer screens?

And that, of course, is the real reason why Greta Thunberg is so triggering. They can’t admit it even to themselves, so they ridicule her instead. But the truth is that they’re afraid of her. The poor dears are terrified of her as an individual, and of what she stands for – youth, determination, change....

She is part of a generation who won’t be cowed. She isn’t about to be shamed into submission by trolls. That’s not actually a look of apocalyptic dread in her eyes. It’s a look that says “you’re not relevant”.

The reason they taunt her with childish insults is because that’s all they’ve got. They’re out of ideas. They can’t dismantle her arguments, because she has science – and David Attenborough – on her side. They can’t win the debate with the persuasive force of their arguments, because these bargain bin cranks trade in jaded cynicism, not youthful passion. They can harangue her with snide tweets and hot take blogposts, but they won’t get a reaction because, frankly, she has bigger worries on her mind....

Why is Greta Thunberg so triggering? Because of what she represents. In an age when democracy is under assault, she hints at the emergency of new kind of power, a convergence of youth, popular protest and irrefutable science. And for her loudest detractors, she also represents something else: the sight of their impending obsolescence hurtling towards them.

ER
24-09-2019, 08:10 PM
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09-24/peter-ridd-raises-500k-to-fight-appeal-bid/11541836

$500K raised in a couple of days. That's where the people put their money where their mouth is and fight for a just cause! Of course, you have the idiots rallying behind a silly 16 yo, who should do much
better if she went back to school to complete her studies before daydreaming of becoming a climatic (shut up A/C I didn't say climactic you irreverent agitator :D :P) modern day Jean D' Arc!

Ian Murray
24-09-2019, 08:15 PM
... a silly 16 yo, who should do much better if she went back to school to complete her studies ...

See Post #4820

ER
24-09-2019, 08:35 PM
See Post #4820

ok. hold on a sec, I am looking at a WCC position now! looks like these guys are doing a Magnus
and play for draws so they can shoot it out in the rapids, blitzes and Armageddons. They either underestimate
their preparation of overestimate that of their opponents... What am I saying people might think this is a
… chess forum. God forbid!!! Ok fair article, overidealizing the girl's abilities though, it won't do her any good in the long run!

Blunderbuss
24-09-2019, 09:04 PM
... you have the idiots rallying behind a silly 16 yo, who should do much
better if she went back to school ...

3889

ER
24-09-2019, 09:42 PM
3889 I 've no clue what you 're talking about! are you ok?

Kevin Bonham
24-09-2019, 10:03 PM
I 've no clue what you 're talking about! are you ok?

Obvious enough to me. Anyone struggling to see Ketan Joshi's point in the first tweet might need to go back to school. :lol: As for the second, when one makes an extremely popular tweet on Twitter, one's mentions column in Twitter software gets swamped with all the cases of other people liking or retweeting it to the point that one can hardly see anything else.

ER
24-09-2019, 10:44 PM
what happened to my response to this? I said "what point man? all I can see is some hieroglyphics and a picture of a guy who looks like that Liverpool striker"!

Kevin Bonham
24-09-2019, 11:02 PM
what happened to my response to this? I said "what point man? all I can see is some hieroglyphics and a picture of a guy who looks like that Liverpool striker"!

It would appear you didn't send it or it didn't go through. No reference to it at this end.

ER
24-09-2019, 11:05 PM
ok thanks!

MichaelBaron
25-09-2019, 12:00 AM
https://www.facebook.com/Libertarian.AU/photos/a.1620643797979870/2647835751927331/?type=3&theater

Ian Murray
25-09-2019, 08:30 AM
https://www.facebook.com/Libertarian.AU/photos/a.1620643797979870/2647835751927331/?type=3&theater

And who is more influential, "CentreLady on Facebook" or Greta Thunberg?

Ian Murray
25-09-2019, 09:10 AM
Australia is the runaway global leader in building new renewable energy (https://theconversation.com/australia-is-the-runaway-global-leader-in-building-new-renewable-energy-123694?)
The Conversation
25.9.19

In Australia, renewable energy is growing at a per capita rate ten times faster than the world average. Between 2018 and 2020, Australia will install more than 16 gigawatts of wind and solar, an average rate of 220 watts per person per year.

This is nearly three times faster than the next fastest country, Germany. Australia is demonstrating to the world how rapidly an industrialised country with a fossil-fuel-dominated electricity system can transition towards low-carbon, renewable power generation....

MichaelBaron
25-09-2019, 11:11 AM
And who is more influential, "CentreLady on Facebook" or Greta Thunberg?

Who is Greta? I've heard some kid has been screaming hysterically all over the place... https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=155660658872158&set=a.155660678872156&type=3&theater

Ian Murray
25-09-2019, 11:41 AM
Who is Greta? I've heard some kid has been screaming hysterically all over the place...

See:
Why is Greta Thunberg so triggering for certain men? (https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/why-is-greta-thunberg-so-triggering-for-certain-men-1.4002264)

Capablanca-Fan
25-09-2019, 01:12 PM
Think Globally, Shame Constantly: The Rise of Greta Thunberg Environmentalism (https://reason.com/2019/09/24/think-globally-shame-constantly-the-rise-of-greta-thunberg-environmentalism)
Her future—and that of the planet—hasn't been "stolen" and the best way forward is through serious policy discussion, not histrionics.
NICK GILLESPIE, Reason, 24 Sep 2019

Such catastrophic thinking is similar to AOC's equally apocalyptic statement that "The world is gonna end in 12 years" and Warren's contention that "we've got, what, 11 years, maybe" to cut our emissions in half to save the planet. As Reason's Ronald Bailey has documented, such predictions stem from a fundamental misreading of a 2018 report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). That report offered up predictions in the growth of global economic activity, how it might be affected by climate change, and how reducing greenhouse gases might increase planetary GDP. It did not specify anything like a 10- to 12-year window after which extinction or amelioration is inevitable. Writes Bailey:


If humanity does nothing whatsoever to abate greenhouse gas emissions, the worst-case scenario is that global GDP in 2100 would be 8.2 percent lower than it would otherwise be.

Let's make those GDP percentages concrete. Assuming no climate change and a global real growth rate of 3 percent per year for the next 81 years, today's $80 trillion economy would grow to just under $880 trillion by 2100. World population is likely to peak at around 9 billion, so divvying up that GDP suggests that global average income would come to about $98,000 per person. Under the worst-case scenario, global GDP would only be $810 trillion and average income would only be $90,000 per person.

"There is no looming climate change 'expiration date,'" writes Bailey, a point underscored by Bjorn Lomborg, president of the Copenhagen Consensus Center, which promotes cost-effective policies to remediate climate change, hunger, disease, and other global issues. Lomborg notes that the IPCC itself


has found the evidence does not support claims that floods, droughts and cyclones are increasing.

The scientists have said, "there is low confidence in a global-scale observed trend" in drought, a "lack of evidence regarding the sign of trend in the magnitude and/or frequency of floods on a global scale" and "no significant observed trends in global (cyclone) frequency over the past century."

What's more, the scientists have found that current human-caused global warming cannot reasonably be linked to any of these extreme weather phenomenon-"globally, there is low confidence in attribution of changes in (cyclone) activity to human influence", "low confidence in detection and attribution of changes in drought" and low confidence "that anthropogenic climate change has affected the frequency and magnitude of floods". This doesn't mean there is no problem-just that the facts matter.

Patrick Byrom
25-09-2019, 01:42 PM
What AOC and Warren are referring to is the desirability of limiting increases in global temperature to 1.5C, after which things get much worse (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/08/global-warming-must-not-exceed-15c-warns-landmark-un-report).

But of course if you ignore the science, and simply pretend that global heating will suddenly stop in 2100, then you have nothing to worry about!

MichaelBaron
25-09-2019, 04:14 PM
See:
Why is Greta Thunberg so triggering for certain men? (https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/why-is-greta-thunberg-so-triggering-for-certain-men-1.4002264)

She is ''triggering''for certain humans - not men only. Shameful for adult to use a kid with mental issues to support their purpose.

Patrick Byrom
25-09-2019, 04:51 PM
She is ''triggering''for certain humans - not men only. Shameful for adult to use a kid with mental issues to support their purpose.Do you have any actual evidence that she is being 'used' by anyone? She's almost 17, and is old enough to join the army in Australia, so - unless you think her age is also too young to join the army - you must agree with me that she is old enough to make her own decisions.

But I'm surprised that you would even suggest that "a kid with mental issues" is not fully responsible for their own actions. This is literally a double standard on your part, considering all your posts arguing that teenage criminals should be held fully responsible for their actions!

antichrist
25-09-2019, 06:46 PM
Do you have any actual evidence that she is being 'used' by anyone? She's almost 17, and is old enough to join the army in Australia, so - unless you think her age is also too young to join the army - you must agree with me that she is old enough to make her own decisions.

But I'm surprised that you would even suggest that "a kid with mental issues" is not fully responsible for their own actions. This is literally a double standard on your part, considering all your posts arguing that teenage criminals should be held fully responsible for their actions!

I am beginning to doubt whether Michael should be held responsible for any crime he may commit.

Ian Murray
25-09-2019, 06:56 PM
She is ''triggering''for certain humans - not men only. Shameful for adult to use a kid with mental issues to support their purpose.

Overwhelmingly men who push back at the thought of a 16yo girl commanding international attention, sparking a global movement of tens of millions of protesters, and invited to address international conferences and the United Nations. Women have no problem with that.

She has achieved more in three years than you will ever look like achieving in a lifetime. She deserves and receives respect, which you and your ilk can't accept.

ER
25-09-2019, 07:06 PM
I would neither doubt Greta's tenacity to fight for causes she believes right, nor her intellectual abilities to do so;
however, apart from what she believes is right, has she any scientific qualifications to bring and evidentially support her cause to international fora levels
and challenge world leaders in a rather obnoxious, disrespectful and boorish manner?



BTW I presume everyone here keeps on pushing under the carpet the plight of professor Peter Ridd who as a new Galileo
dared to claim that the earth moves and that climate warming has nothing to do with the situation in Great Barrier Reef
having to pay a high price for it.

https://ipa.org.au/peterridd?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIq6iKwsvr5AIVmQVyCh1Tpg wnEAAYASAAEgISOvD_BwE


There’s some absolute rubbish being spoken about the reef and people’s livelihoods are being put in jeopardy.
If nobody will stand up, then this is just going to go on and on and on. It has to be stopped.

Well at least people who put their money where their mouth is, give him great support
in his effort to fight the James Cook University's appeal against the initial court's compensation decision.
See, as it has been continually proved here talk is cheap!

Ian Murray
25-09-2019, 07:31 PM
Think Globally, Shame Constantly: The Rise of Greta Thunberg Environmentalism (https://reason.com/2019/09/24/think-globally-shame-constantly-the-rise-of-greta-thunberg-environmentalism)
Her future—and that of the planet—hasn't been "stolen" and the best way forward is through serious policy discussion, not histrionics.
NICK GILLESPIE, Reason, 24 Sep 2019

Such catastrophic thinking is similar to AOC's equally apocalyptic statement that "The world is gonna end in 12 years" and Warren's contention that "we've got, what, 11 years, maybe" to cut our emissions in half to save the planet. As Reason's Ronald Bailey has documented, such predictions stem from a fundamental misreading of a 2018 report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). That report offered up predictions in the growth of global economic activity, how it might be affected by climate change …

The IPCC report does predict catastrophic climate change (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/08/global-warming-must-not-exceed-15c-warns-landmark-un-report) by 2030 if urgent steps are not taken. Gillespie's article paraphrases and cherry picks some of the report's findings to alter their meanings. Some actual quotes from the report:


B.1 Climate models project robust differences in regional climate characteristics between present-day and global warming of 1.5°C ,and between 1.5°C and 2°C. These differences include increases in: mean temperature in most land and ocean regions (high confidence), hot extremes in most inhabited regions (high confidence), heavy precipitation in several regions (medium confidence), and the probability of drought and precipitation deficits in some regions (medium confidence).

B.1.2. Temperature extremes on land are projected to warm more than GMST (high confidence): extreme hot days in mid-latitudes warm by up to about 3°C at global warming of 1.5°C and about 4°C at 2°C, and extreme cold nights in high latitudes warm by up to about 4.5°C at 1.5°C and about 6°C at 2°C (high confidence). The number of hot days is projected to increase in most land regions, with highest increases in the tropics (high confidence).

B.1.3. Risks from droughts and precipitation deficits are projected to be higher at 2°C compared to 1.5°C of global warming in some regions (medium confidence). Risks from heavy precipitation events are projected to be higher at 2°C compared to 1.5°C of global warming in several northern hemisphere high-latitude and/or high-elevation regions, eastern Asia and eastern North America (medium confidence). Heavy precipitation associated with tropical cyclones is projected to be higher at 2°C compared to 1.5°C global warming (medium confidence). There is generally low confidence in projected changes in heavy precipitation at 2°C compared to 1.5°C in other regions. Heavy precipitation when aggregated at global scale is projected to be higher at 2°C than at 1.5°C of global warming (medium confidence). As a consequence of heavy precipitation, the fraction of the global land area affected by flood hazards is projected to be larger at 2°C compared to 1.5°C of global warming (medium confidence).

B.2.2. Sea level rise will continue beyond 2100 even if global warming is limited to 1.5°C in the 21st century (high confidence). Marine ice sheet instability in Antarctica and/or irreversible loss of the Greenland ice sheet could result in multi-metre rise in sea level over hundreds to thousands of years. These instabilities could be triggered at around 1.5°C to 2°C of global warming (medium confidence).

B.5.5 Risks to global aggregated economic growth due to climate change impacts are projected to be lower at 1.5°C than at 2°C by the end of this century (medium confidence). This excludes the costs of mitigation, adaptation investments and the benefits of adaptation. Countries in the tropics and Southern Hemisphere subtropics are projected to experience the largest impacts on economic growth due to climate change should global warming increase from 1.5°C to 2°C (medium confidence)
(Here, impacts on economic growth refer to changes in gross domestic product (GDP). Many impacts, such as loss of human lives, cultural heritage and ecosystem services, are difficult to value and monetize)

D.5.3 Global model pathways limiting global warming to 1.5°C are projected to involve the annual average investment needs in the energy system of around 2.4 trillion USD2010 between 2016 and 2035, representing about 2.5% of the world GDP (medium confidence).

IPCC Special Report: Global Warming of 1.5ºC (https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/)

The projection of individual income doubling by 2100 is meaningless. In the 80 years 1935 - 2015 personal income in the US increased more than a hundredfold (https://www.infoplease.com/business-finance/poverty-and-income/capita-personal-income). If incomes over the next 80 years increased a hundredfold, we'd all be millionaires. The reality of course is that the cost of living also increases as incomes increase. If current trends continue, the gap between wages and COL will continue to widen and workers will be worse off.

antichrist
25-09-2019, 08:24 PM
The Climate protest in Byron Bay last Friday may be the largest per ratio of the population ever in OZ. It is reported in Echo that six to ten thousand people attended. The town's population is 12,000, of course many outsiders came in but still to equal approximately three quarters of the town's population is amazing. It would equivalent to approx. 2,000,000 protesting in Sydney that has never happened . Maybe they will get somewhere.

Patrick Byrom
25-09-2019, 08:35 PM
I would neither doubt Greta's tenacity to fight for causes she believes right, nor her intellectual abilities to do so; however, apart from what she believes is right, has she any scientific qualifications to bring and evidentially support her cause to international fora levels and challenge world leaders in a rather obnoxious, disrespectful and boorish manner?You don't need scientific qualifications to understand the science. The basic issues can be understood by anyone with a high school education. Anyway, lots of politicians with no scientific training (like Donald Trump) don't seem to have any problem in lecturing people on the science of global warming.


BTW I presume everyone here keeps on pushing under the carpet the plight of professor Peter Ridd who as a new Galileo dared to claim that the earth moves and that climate warming has nothing to do with the situation in Great Barrier Reef having to pay a high price for it.
https://ipa.org.au/peterridd?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIq6iKwsvr5AIVmQVyCh1Tpg wnEAAYASAAEgISOvD_BwE
I posted a detailed rebuttal of Ridd's claims a few months ago. You're welcome to respond to it.

This paper (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0025326X18301425) is a response to Ridd's claims which rebuts them in detail. Note that his claim that private enterprise does it better is particularly doubtful: ...
EDIT: Reading that paper, Ridd appears to have made a lot of easily avoidable mistakes. I had assumed that his criticisms would have been at least partially justifiable, but they seem to be very weak indeed. For example: ...
Based on the mistakes he has made, it's hard to take his criticism of reef science seriously.

Note that Ridd wasn't sacked for his scientific claims, but for his repeated attacks on his colleagues and JCU.

MichaelBaron
26-09-2019, 01:29 AM
I would neither doubt Greta's tenacity to fight for causes she believes right, nor her intellectual abilities to do so;
however, apart from what she believes is right, has she any scientific qualifications to bring and evidentially support her cause to international fora levels
and challenge world leaders in a rather obnoxious, disrespectful and boorish manner?



BTW I presume everyone here keeps on pushing under the carpet the plight of professor Peter Ridd who as a new Galileo
dared to claim that the earth moves and that climate warming has nothing to do with the situation in Great Barrier Reef
having to pay a high price for it.

https://ipa.org.au/peterridd?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIq6iKwsvr5AIVmQVyCh1Tpg wnEAAYASAAEgISOvD_BwE



Well at least people who put their money where their mouth is, give him great support
in his effort to fight the James Cook University's appeal against the initial court's compensation decision.
See, as it has been continually proved here talk is cheap!

I actually doubt Greta's mental state...in fact she did admit herself to having some kind of mental condition I believe.

Capablanca-Fan
26-09-2019, 06:14 AM
You don't need scientific qualifications to understand the science. The basic issues can be understood by anyone with a high school education. Anyway, lots of politicians with no scientific training (like Donald Trump) don't seem to have any problem in lecturing people on the science of global warming.
They can understand that CO₂ absorbs IR, but have no clue about whether their remedies are worse than the disease. And as documented above, this girl has not understood the IPCC report, but has been fed scary stuff that the world will end soon unless we abandon all fossil fuels right now.


Note that Ridd wasn't sacked for his scientific claims, but for his repeated attacks on his colleagues and JCU.
What nonsense. Of course they make excuses like that, but their issue was the content not alleged tone.

Capablanca-Fan
26-09-2019, 06:20 AM
I actually doubt Greta's mental state … in fact she did admit herself to having some kind of mental condition I believe.

Yeah, typical of the Left: use kids to make their points, claim that we all need to listen to them. But when people dare to answer back, the same Left accusing them of "attacking children".

And when her opponents point out her autism and OCD, it's bad. But a few years ago, the Left pointed out exactly the same things.

Desmond
26-09-2019, 08:01 AM
Yeah, typical of the Left: use kids to make their points, claim that we all need to listen to them. But when people dare to answer back, the same Left accusing them of "attacking children".

And when her opponents point out her autism and OCD, it's bad. But a few years ago, the Left pointed out exactly the same things.

As per #4824 (http://www.chesschat.org/showthread.php?6637-Man-Made-Climate-Change-Issues-and-debates&p=453772&viewfull=1#post453772) that went over ER's head, kids like 93-year-old Sir David Attenborough?

Ian Murray
26-09-2019, 08:09 AM
Yeah, typical of the Left: use kids to make their points, claim that we all need to listen to them. But when people dare to answer back, the same Left accusing them of "attacking children".

And when her opponents point out her autism and OCD, it's bad. But a few years ago, the Left pointed out exactly the same things.

Typical of the Right: refuse to believe that kids these days are smart enough to think for themselves.

ER
26-09-2019, 08:21 AM
As per #4824 (http://www.chesschat.org/showthread.php?6637-Man-Made-Climate-Change-Issues-and-debates&p=453772&viewfull=1#post453772) that went over ER's head, kids like 93-year-old Sir David Attenborough?

obviously, what you failed to comprehend (not unusual) is that I could not read the twitter or whatever text at all (re hieroglyphics - no use to search the word it's beyond your level) all I could see was a couple of pictures of a bearded guy!

Ian Murray
26-09-2019, 08:37 AM
They can understand that CO₂ absorbs IR, but have no clue about whether their remedies are worse than the disease. And as documented above, this girl has not understood the IPCC report, but has been fed scary stuff that the world will end soon unless we abandon all fossil fuels right now.

The IPCC report is crystal clear - we have until 2030 to rein in carbon emissions drastically (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/08/global-warming-must-not-exceed-15c-warns-landmark-un-report), or we lose our last chance to limit global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. At 2° above things start to get really hairy, above 2° all bets are off. Greta has every reason to be outraged at the poor response from world leaders.

3890

ER
26-09-2019, 08:38 AM
You don't need scientific qualifications to understand the science.
The basic issues can be understood by anyone with a high school education

Well Professor Peter Ridd definitely understands much more than the basics of science.


I posted a detailed rebuttal of Ridd's claims a few months ago. You're welcome to respond to it.

What absolute nonsense, you rebutted the claims of a highly respectable academic with 30 years experience on the field!
Spare me the torment of reading your biased crap. Thanks!



Note that Ridd wasn't sacked for his scientific claims, but for his repeated attacks on his colleagues and JCU.

Some more silly comments. He was pushing forward his scientific opinion and his dismissal was found grossly unfair by a court of law.

Desmond
26-09-2019, 09:05 AM
obviously, what you failed to comprehend (not unusual) is that I could not read the twitter or whatever text at all (re hieroglyphics - no use to search the word it's beyond your level) all I could see was a couple of pictures of a bearded guy!

Indeed, if you think an image with English writing on it is hieroglyphics, we do indeed have a different understanding of the word.

ER
26-09-2019, 09:44 AM
Indeed, if you think an image with English writing on it is hieroglyphics, we do indeed have a different understanding of the word.

Hieroglyphics = in this case indecipherable, illegible, unreadable twitterish TEXT TEXT TEXT neither English nor any other language. and a couple of pictures! No point to continue this.
Go back to the sin bin where you had been placed when all you had to contribute to a discussion I was trying to have with you was a monotonous repetition of "so what?"! For the time
being I keep the other two jokers out due to the good laughs I have reading their stuff!

Desmond
26-09-2019, 09:51 AM
Hieroglyphics = in this case indecipherable, illegible, unreadable That's not what hieroglyphics means, so before you go throwing accusations that someone doesn't know what a word means perhaps you should use it appropriately yourself. :hand:

As for the rest, I'm still not sure if you're having some technical problem reading #4824, or if you don't understand the point being made, or if you're just being deliberatley obtuse.

ER
26-09-2019, 10:09 AM
Now, where's that A/C's comment re God, and my attitude to Muslims. Pinpoint it you sinner, I have some good responses to it!

Kevin Bonham
26-09-2019, 10:42 AM
Now, where's that A/C's comment re God, and my attitude to Muslims. Pinpoint it you sinner, I have some good responses to it!

I decided it was probably threadjacking and deleted it.

Blunderbuss
26-09-2019, 11:22 AM
As always I find myself in furious agreement with Richard Flanagan: Greta Thunbergs 495 word UN speech points us to a future of hope or despair (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/sep/26/greta-thunbergs-495-word-un-speech-points-us-to-a-future-of-hope-or-despair)


On Wednesday the Australian prime minister Scott Morrison, the nation’s creepy gaslighter-in-chief, criticised Thunberg for similar reasons to Trump, saying, “I think we’ve got to caution against raising the anxieties of children in our country.”

Since 1996 – seven years before Greta Thunberg was born – the Liberal party has been working assiduously to advance the cause of fossil fuel companies at the expense of our future. Morrison’s paternalistic piffle is just one more piece of grotesque bad faith on an issue about which the Liberal record is one of lying, scheming and wrecking at every step for over two decades. With his bluster of quiet Australians, Morrison is trying to pull a spit hood over the nation to silence us all.

...

Watching Greta Thunberg’s speech I understood what last Friday was about: a historic turning point where for the first time the power of we met the power of you without artifice, without compromise and with a ferocious courage.

Millions marched last Friday. The next march will be bigger. The battle lines are finally clear. And each of us must now decide: am I you or am I we?

Powerful stuff!

MichaelBaron
26-09-2019, 11:30 AM
Can someone confirm to me whether Greta has been diagnosed with a mental health issue or not? And if yes, whether this issue impacts one's actions/thinking?

Ian Murray
26-09-2019, 11:55 AM
Can someone confirm to me whether Greta has been diagnosed with a mental health issue or not? And if yes, whether this issue impacts one's actions/thinking?

She has Ausperger's Syndrome (https://www.marketwatch.com/story/greta-thunberg-is-facing-attacks-over-her-aspergers-but-heres-why-companies-want-to-hire-people-on-the-autism-spectrum-2019-09-25), which is on the autism spectrum. It is not a mental health issue but a difference in communication.

Is Autism a Mental Illness? (https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/abcs-child-psychiatry/201510/is-autism-mental-illness)

Blunderbuss
26-09-2019, 11:57 AM
Can someone confirm to me whether Greta has been diagnosed with a mental health issue or not? And if yes, whether this issue impacts one's actions/thinking?

Maybe this will help you: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3092984 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3092984/)/

Desmond
26-09-2019, 12:49 PM
Maybe this will help you: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3092984 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3092984/)/

Interesting. Maybe this:


...Conservatives respond to threatening situations with more aggression than do liberals [1] and are more sensitive to threatening facial expressions [5]. This heightened sensitivity to emotional faces suggests that individuals with conservative orientation might exhibit differences in brain structures associated with emotional processing such as the amygdala. ...

explains why ER gets so butthurt when he's corrected. Maybe I'll ask him in a year when he stops pretending to ignore me. :lol:

Patrick Byrom
26-09-2019, 12:51 PM
They can understand that CO₂ absorbs IR, but have no clue about whether their remedies are worse than the disease. ... Sigh ... They can also understand that, as carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, the more carbon dioxide we add to the atmosphere, the more the temperatures increase. I've never heard Donald Trump - or you - agree with that!


What nonsense. Of course they make excuses like that, but their issue was the content not alleged tone.Evidence?

Patrick Byrom
26-09-2019, 12:59 PM
Well Professor Peter Ridd definitely understands much more than the basics of science.He's an expert in his field, which isn't marine biology.

What absolute nonsense, you rebutted the claims of a highly respectable academic with 30 years experience on the field!The rebuttal was by experts in the field (he's not a marine biologist), which is what I posted.

Spare me the torment of reading your biased crap. Thanks!Eppur si muove!

Some more silly comments. He was pushing forward his scientific opinion and his dismissal was found grossly unfair by a court of law.Vasta made it clear what the case was about (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/sep/06/peter-ridd-awarded-12m-in-unfair-dismissal-case-against-james-cook-university):

Vasta made clear in his judgment in April those matters were not on trial. “Some have thought that this trial was about freedom of speech and intellectual freedom,” he said. “Media reports have considered that this trial was about silencing persons with controversial or unpopular views. “Rather, this trial was purely and simply about the proper construction of a clause in an enterprise agreement.”

Blunderbuss
26-09-2019, 04:00 PM
...explains why ER gets so butthurt when he's corrected. Maybe I'll ask him in a year when he stops pretending to ignore me. :lol:

:lol: meep meep :lol:

MichaelBaron
26-09-2019, 04:49 PM
Maybe this will help you: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3092984 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3092984/)/

Too complex...
But as there are at least 3 conditions that she has been ''officially'' diagnosed with...with look into those conditions

Ian Murray
26-09-2019, 06:47 PM
Too complex...
But as there are at least 3 conditions that she has been ''officially'' diagnosed with...with look into those conditions

Oh? And those three are?

ER
26-09-2019, 07:09 PM
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/sep/26/co2-is-plant-food-australian-group-signs-international-declaration-denying-climate-science

Despite their left leaning and not so objective editorial views, the Guardian news items still keep on
informing us on important developments re climate warming and all that jazz.

Ian Murray
26-09-2019, 08:11 PM
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/sep/26/co2-is-plant-food-australian-group-signs-international-declaration-denying-climate-science

Despite their left leaning and not so objective editorial views, the Guardian news items still keep on
informing us on important developments re climate warming and all that jazz.

Perhaps you should read the article in full

ER
26-09-2019, 08:55 PM
Perhaps you should read the article in full

news is news is news, the rest is here
Despite their left leaning and not so objective editorial views,

also listen and learn when your PM speaks. don't go to town with just Greta's kinder garden lectures!

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/sep/26/scott-morrison-says-australias-record-on-climate-change-misrepresented-by-media

Ian Murray
26-09-2019, 09:28 PM
news is news is news, the rest is here

Whatever point you're trying to make eludes me. The article discredits the new so-called climate science organisation.


also listen and learn when your PM speaks. don't go to town with just Greta's kinder garden lectures!

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/sep/26/scott-morrison-says-australias-record-on-climate-change-misrepresented-by-media

Again The Guardian discredits Morrison's arguments

Desmond
26-09-2019, 09:44 PM
Perhaps you should read the article in fullLike this bit:


Also signing the declaration is Dr Peter Ridd, the former James Cook University scientist who claims that devastating bleaching events on the Great Barrier Reef are not driven by climate change.

Ridd was backed by Queensland’s beef and sugar cane industries to deliver a speaking tour in an attempt to undermine the science linking run-off from farms and poor water quality to coral declines. His views have helped force a Coalition-backed Senate inquiry into reef science.

The former chief scientist Ian Chubb compared Ridd’s efforts to the misinformation campaigns run by the tobacco industry on the impacts of cigarettes on public health.

ER
26-09-2019, 09:58 PM
Whatever point you're trying to make eludes me. The article discredits the new so-called climate science organisation.
Again The Guardian discredits Morrison's arguments

I really find it hard to believe you are as thick as you think you are!
How can I say it, I have pointed it out twice! Iam not interested about
the Guardian's political leanings! I am talking about the NEWS item, not the BLOODY screwball
leftist propaganda behind it!

MichaelBaron
26-09-2019, 10:49 PM
Like this bit:


Also signing the declaration is Dr Peter Ridd, the former James Cook University scientist who claims that devastating bleaching events on the Great Barrier Reef are not driven by climate change.

Ridd was backed by Queensland’s beef and sugar cane industries to deliver a speaking tour in an attempt to undermine the science linking run-off from farms and poor water quality to coral declines. His views have helped force a Coalition-backed Senate inquiry into reef science.

The former chief scientist Ian Chubb compared Ridd’s efforts to the misinformation campaigns run by the tobacco industry on the impacts of cigarettes on public health.

I find it amazing that a scientific debate between Ridd, Cubb etc is going on yet...so many people feel...that ''inquiry into reef science is not required'''.....everyone seems to be such an expert on climate change these days :)

antichrist
26-09-2019, 11:25 PM
I find it amazing that a scientific debate between Ridd, Cubb etc is going on yet...so many people feel...that ''inquiry into reef science is not required'''.....everyone seems to be such an expert on climate change these days :)

It is such a simple concept one does not need to be an expert to take it at face value and have appropriate concern. My fish pond analogy stands up apparently. Environmentalists over time recognise a pattern of disconcern regarding the reef. In the sixties it was the battle over oil drilling the Reef in spite of big accidents overseas and fires that burnt for weeks that polluted everything. Back then concerned people were denigrated as commos, ratbags etc.. No scientific qualification were necessary to make a simple judgement that protection is necessary and that the dollar is not everything in life. If only the baby boomers like myself would drop off the edge of the earth without wrecking the joint on the way out. It all began with the Grey Nomad concept of selfishly polluting big - a modern analogy would be the fortune that oldish rich people spend on dental implants when a simple and relatively cheap denture would do the trick. My grandfather only used home made tooth picks (no brush and toothpaste) and still had his teeth until death in his nineties.

Capablanca-Fan
27-09-2019, 02:08 AM
Socialism, Not Climate Change, Is the Real Threat
Emma Roberts, RealClearPolitics, 24 Sept 2019

It is preposterous to me that many of my peers are so afraid of climate change that they say they can hardly think about it. I think what they should really be afraid of is government overreach caused by such exaggeration over the effects of climate change.

Back in the 1960s, some scientists believed that by 1975, the human race would perish through famine caused by climate change. Funny thing, the human race is now 7.5 billion strong. Fast-forward 10 years to the 1970s, and scientists were claiming that the world was entering a new ice age, or, in other words, that we were imperiled by global freezing.

Now it is 2019 (about the same time scientists had predicted the world would be frozen over), and many of my peers, as well as plenty of adults, believe that the world is going to end due to global warming, and there is nothing we can do to stop it.

None of this sounds like freedom to me, and that is because it is not freedom; it is government control. It is government control over the single black mother who now won’t be able to afford her electricity. It is government control over the Hispanic immigrant who, because the construction machines he operates are not “eco-friendly,” will lose his job and not be able to put food on the table for his family. This is not the American way. It doesn’t make sense to implement regulations that do not solve the problem and yet adversely affect the American people so greatly.

The government wants control. And its excuse is the thin veil of only wanting the best for people and the Earth. But the result of ceding so much control to government that we will have no choice in what job we have, no choice in what car we drive, and no choice in the price we pay for our electricity.

That’s not freedom. And frankly, the possibility of such government overreach scares me a lot more than global warming, which seems to be just another ridiculous scientific prediction. Yes, we need to be good stewards of the Earth. We need to take care of our natural resources, because they are the only ones we have. But the government cannot do it for us, and if it tries, it will only wreak havoc.

The good news is we are taking care of our environment; America’s air and water are cleaner than ever, even as our economy has expanded and our population has increased. My peers should take note, so that in 20 year or 30 years or 50 years, we’ll still enjoy the freedoms that set America apart.

MichaelBaron
27-09-2019, 02:46 AM
It is such a simple concept one does not need to be an expert to take it at face value and have appropriate concern.

Or yes...so simple indeed....
All i can say is...ignorance is blessed!

antichrist
27-09-2019, 07:48 AM
Or yes...so simple indeed....
All i can say is...ignorance is blessed!

I quite "successfully" played the Queens Gambit for years without studying nor understanding it. I watched my champ friend play it against me and it worked for him and it worked for me. Of course after studying I understand why it worked.

Michael, even the ancient Jews/Hebrews had conservation matters, environmental and hygienic concerns expressed into their morality and scripts. The denying of pigs I guess would have been brought about by a health scare either from the pig or from becoming over weight. Strictly speaking you can't be a real Jew without having the concerns of the ancients close by. Due to inappropriate agricultural practices desertification has been occurring in many regions for decades that I am aware of and this is occurring whilst the human population is increasing. Do I need to be an expert to be against short term agricultural practises? I protested against conscription for the Vietnam civil war because I was against killing someone I didn't perceive as an enemy - I did not have to go to Vietnam to make an informed opinion, I just had to study history. Most North Vietnamese troops had probably never heard of Australia before we entered the conflict so I don't think that we were in their sights.

Ian Murray
27-09-2019, 08:39 AM
Like this bit:


Also signing the declaration is Dr Peter Ridd, the former James Cook University scientist who claims that devastating bleaching events on the Great Barrier Reef are not driven by climate change.

Ridd was backed by Queensland’s beef and sugar cane industries to deliver a speaking tour in an attempt to undermine the science linking run-off from farms and poor water quality to coral declines. His views have helped force a Coalition-backed Senate inquiry into reef science.

The former chief scientist Ian Chubb compared Ridd’s efforts to the misinformation campaigns run by the tobacco industry on the impacts of cigarettes on public health.

Quite so. But pointing it out is rather fraught.

Ian Murray
27-09-2019, 08:42 AM
I find it amazing that a scientific debate between Ridd, Cubb etc is going on yet...so many people feel...that ''inquiry into reef science is not required'''.....everyone seems to be such an expert on climate change these days :)

There is no scientific debate between Chubb and Ridd. Chubb dismissed Ridd's claims as biased and self-serving.

Ian Murray
27-09-2019, 11:28 AM
A girl about Greta's age takes a dissenting view—ignored by the Leftmedia of course
Socialism, Not Climate Change, Is the Real Threat (A girl about Greta's age takes a dissenting view—ignored by the Leftmedia of course)
Emma Roberts, RealClearPolitics, 24 Sept 2019

And rightly ignored by the mainstream media. She deplores "exaggeration over the effects of climate change" then makes outlandish claims of her own, with no apparent fact-checking effort.


"...Back in the 1960s, some scientists believed that by 1975, the human race would perish through famine caused by climate change..."

Human extinction by 1975 from climate change? Some scientists? Two, ten,1000? Or is she thinking of Ehrlich's 1968 book The Population Bomb predicting mass famine events due to over-population?
The Book That Incited a Worldwide Fear of Overpopulation (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/book-incited-worldwide-fear-overpopulation-180967499/)


" ...the 1970s, and scientists were claiming that the world was entering a new ice age,..."

Scientists were claiming? Scientists have been calculating the global warming effects of CO2 emissions since 1896. There was some limited speculation in the 1970s that atmospheric aerosols could deflect sunlight causing cooling, which gained little traction.
Climate myths: They predicted global cooling in the 1970s (https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11643-climate-myths-they-predicted-global-cooling-in-the-1970s/)


" ...Now it is 2019 (about the same time scientists had predicted the world would be frozen over), and many of my peers, as well as plenty of adults, believe that the world is going to end due to global warming, and there is nothing we can do to stop it. .."

Scientists did not predict the world would be frozen over. Science has the solutions - see the Special Report: Global Warming of 1.5 ºC (https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/), findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released last year. All it takes is the political will to take action.


" ...Studies show that if the U.S. fully implemented the Green New Deal, the temperature of Earth would decrease by no more than 0.097 degrees Fahrenheit over a span of 30 years. .."

Which studies? I can't find any


" ...But the price of electricity would increase by almost 10 times its current amount. The price of gasoline would increase astronomically, .."

Actually renewables are driving the price of energy down. Where is she getting this stuff - I can't find it.


" ...it is estimated that in the state of Texas alone, such regulations would cause the loss of over a million jobs. .."

Again, no attribution. Estimated by whom?


" ... global warming, which seems to be just another ridiculous scientific prediction .."

She must be one of the very few people left who still don't believe that global warming is happening

idledim
27-09-2019, 03:00 PM
The Lesson for today is taken from the Gospel according to IPCC, Chapter 14, Section 14.2.2.2.

In climate research and modelling, we should recognize that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore that the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.


Exegesis: a-climate-modeller-spills-the-beans (https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2019/09/a-climate-modeller-spills-the-beans/)

There’s a top-level oceanographer and meteorologist who is prepared to cry “Nonsense!”on the “global warming crisis” evident to climate modellers but not in the real world. He’s as well or better qualified than the modellers he criticises — the ones whose Year 2100 forebodings of 4degC warming have set the world to spending $US1.5 trillion a year to combat CO2 emissions.

The iconoclast is Dr. Mototaka Nakamura. In June he put out a small book in Japanese on “the sorry state of climate science”. It’s titled Confessions of a climate scientist: the global warming hypothesis is an unproven hypothesis, and he is very much qualified to take a stand. From 1990 to 2014 he worked on cloud dynamics and forces mixing atmospheric and ocean flows on medium to planetary scales. His bases were MIT (for a Doctor of Science in meteorology), Georgia Institute of Technology, Goddard Space Flight Centre, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Duke and Hawaii Universities and the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology. He’s published about 20 climate papers on fluid dynamics.

Confessions of a Climate Scientist (https://www.amazon.com.au/kikoukagakushanokokuhaku-chikyuuonndannkahamikennshounokasetsu-Japanese-Nakamura-Mototaka-ebook/dp/B07FKHF7T2/ref=sr_1_1?crid=3A8TH90UI9WLH&keywords=mototaka+nakamura&qid=1569559165&sprefix=mototaka+%2Caps%2C326&sr=8-1)

Patrick Byrom
27-09-2019, 03:21 PM
The Lesson for today is taken from the Gospel according to IPCC, Chapter 14, Section 14.2.2.2.
In climate research and modelling, we should recognize that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore that the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible. ...
Of course, the IPCC is not referring to increases in temperature caused by increases in man-made carbon dioxide, which can be predicted. And were repeatedly predicted, most notably by James Hansen almost forty years ago (https://phys.org/news/2012-04-climate-eerily-accurate.html).

And if the climate is a chaotic system, the worst thing that you could possibly do is to amplify the chaos by adding more carbon dioxide (increasing the 'forcing' in physics terminology)!

idledim
27-09-2019, 03:39 PM
Of course, the IPCC is not referring to increases in temperature caused by increases in man-made carbon dioxide, which can be predicted. And were repeatedly predicted, most notably by James Hansen almost forty years ago (https://phys.org/news/2012-04-climate-eerily-accurate.html).

And if the climate is a chaotic system, the worst thing that you could possibly do is to amplify the chaos by adding more carbon dioxide (increasing the 'forcing' in physics terminology)!

It would be more helpful if you could respond directly to Mototaka's arguments. How do you respond to what he says about solar inputs? Ice-albedo feedbacks? Water Vapour? Clouds? Oceans - particularly large and small-scale ocean dynamics? He does have a bit to say about 'forcing' in the English appendix -and is especially critical of the way the simulations treat it.

Ian Murray
27-09-2019, 03:49 PM
An Angry Middle-Aged Man’s Guide to Greta Thunberg (https://chaser.com.au/world/an-angry-middle-aged-mans-guide-to-greta-thunberg/)
The Chaser

Are you angry at Greta Thunberg? Do you find yourself enraged that a 16 year old girl would have the temerity to ask adults to listen to the science? This guide is for you.

We’ve compiled a list of ways to cope with the complex range of emotions you’re currently feeling. ...

idledim
27-09-2019, 04:08 PM
An Angry Middle-Aged Man’s Guide to Greta Thunberg (https://chaser.com.au/world/an-angry-middle-aged-mans-guide-to-greta-thunberg/)
The Chaser

Are you angry at Greta Thunberg? Do you find yourself enraged that a 16 year old girl would have the temerity to ask adults to listen to the science? This guide is for you.

We’ve compiled a list of ways to cope with the complex range of emotions you’re currently feeling. ...

That sounds like the blind leading the blind. I mean .... who are these privileged, white, middle-aged men thinking they can give advice to other privileged, white, middle-aged men. Never forget: these are the same privileged,white, middle-aged men who came (boater in hand) to raise money for a new rowing shed for the sons of other privileged white middle aged men -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEUP0vH5cWI

And what about all those black, working class, Islamic women who aren't angry at Greta - but just a bit sad that her apocalyptic, hectoring, dystopian rhetoric is about as useful as a pork chop at a Jewish wedding?

ER
27-09-2019, 04:12 PM
https://youtu.be/1N29vkIT3eo

What drives you on
Can drive you mad
A million lies to sell yourself
Is all you ever had

sounds familiar? :D :P

Patrick Byrom
27-09-2019, 05:05 PM
It would be more helpful if you could respond directly to Mototaka's arguments. How do you respond to what he says about solar inputs? Ice-albedo feedbacks? Water Vapour? Clouds? Oceans - particularly large and small-scale ocean dynamics? He does have a bit to say about 'forcing' in the English appendix -and is especially critical of the way the simulations treat it.
I had a quick look at the Quadrant article - which seems to have little to do with your IPCC quote. This claim is already nonsense:

Today’s vast panoply of “global warming science” is like an upside down pyramid built on the work of a few score of serious climate modellers. They claim to have demonstrated human-derived CO2 emissions as the cause of recent global warming and project that warming forward. Every orthodox climate researcher takes such output from the modellers’ black boxes as a given.
As I have repeatedly explained, we know that man-made carbon dioxide is the cause of warming because of basic physics, not climate models. James Hansen didn't need a computer model to accurately predict the rise of global temperatures forty years ago.

And if Nakamura believes that the temperature data is the result of a global conspiracy by scientists - a claim that has already been demolished here - then it's hard to take anything else he says seriously:

Somehow that official warning was deep-sixed by the alarmists. Now Nakamura has found it again, further accusing the orthodox scientists of “data falsification” by adjusting previous temperature data to increase apparent warming “The global surface mean temperature-change data no longer have any scientific value and are nothing except a propaganda tool to the public,” he writes.

Patrick Byrom
27-09-2019, 05:08 PM
https://youtu.be/1N29vkIT3eo
What drives you on
Can drive you mad
A million lies to sell yourself
Is all you ever had
sounds familiar? :D :PThe laws of physics are "lies"? Can you explain which ones exactly?

Ian Murray
27-09-2019, 05:15 PM
It would be more helpful if you could respond directly to Mototaka's arguments. How do you respond to what he says about solar inputs? Ice-albedo feedbacks? Water Vapour? Clouds? Oceans - particularly large and small-scale ocean dynamics? He does have a bit to say about 'forcing' in the English appendix -and is especially critical of the way the simulations treat it.

In Assessment Report 4 (2007) IPCC evaluated climate models (https://www.ipcc.ch › site › assets › uploads › 2018/02 › ar4-wg1-chapter8-1):


Confidence in model estimates of future climate
evolution has been enhanced via a range of advances since the
IPCC Third Assessment Report (TAR).
Climate models are based on well-established physical
principles and have been demonstrated to reproduce observed
features of recent climate (see Chapters 8 and 9) and past climate
changes (see Chapter 6). There is considerable confidence that
Atmosphere-Ocean General Circulation Models (AOGCMs)
provide credible quantitative estimates of future climate
change, particularly at continental and larger scales. Confidence
in these estimates is higher for some climate variables (e.g.,
temperature) than for others (e.g., precipitation). This summary
highlights areas of progress since the TAR:
• Enhanced scrutiny of models and expanded diagnostic
analysis of model behaviour have been increasingly
facilitated by internationally coordinated efforts to
collect and disseminate output from model experiments
performed under common conditions. This has encouraged
a more comprehensive and open evaluation of models.
The expanded evaluation effort, encompassing a diversity
of perspectives, makes it less likely that significant model
errors are being overlooked.
• Climate models are being subjected to more
comprehensive tests, including, for example, evaluations
of forecasts on time scales from days to a year. This more
diverse set of tests increases confidence in the fidelity
with which models represent processes that affect climate
projections.
• Substantial progress has been made in understanding the
inter-model differences in equilibrium climate sensitivity.
Cloud feedbacks have been confirmed as a primary source
of these differences, with low clouds making the largest
contribution. New observational and modelling evidence
strongly supports a combined water vapour-lapse rate
feedback of a strength comparable to that found in
General Circulation Models (approximately 1 W m–2 °C–1,
corresponding to around a 50% amplification of global
mean warming). The magnitude of cryospheric feedbacks
remains uncertain, contributing to the range of model
climate responses at mid- to high latitudes.
• There have been ongoing improvements to resolution,
computational methods and parametrizations, and
additional processes (e.g., interactive aerosols) have been
included in more of the climate models.
• Most AOGCMs no longer use flux adjustments, which
were previously required to maintain a stable climate.
At the same time, there have been improvements in
the simulation of many aspects of present climate. The
uncertainty associated with the use of flux adjustments
has therefore decreased, although biases and long-term
trends remain in AOGCM control simulations.
• Progress in the simulation of important modes of climate
variability has increased the overall confidence in the
models’ representation of important climate processes.
As a result of steady progress, some AOGCMs can now
simulate important aspects of the El Niño-Southern
Oscillation (ENSO). Simulation of the Madden-Julian
Oscillation (MJO) remains unsatisfactory.
• The ability of AOGCMs to simulate extreme events,
especially hot and cold spells, has improved. The
frequency and amount of precipitation falling in intense
events are underestimated
• Simulation of extratropical cyclones has improved. Some
models used for projections of tropical cyclone changes
can simulate successfully the observed frequency and
distribution of tropical cyclones.
• Systematic biases have been found in most models’
simulation of the Southern Ocean. Since the Southern
Ocean is important for ocean heat uptake, this results in
some uncertainty in transient climate response.
• The possibility that metrics based on observations might
be used to constrain model projections of climate change
has been explored for the first time, through the analysis
of ensembles of model simulations. Nevertheless, a
proven set of model metrics that might be used to narrow
the range of plausible climate projections has yet to be
developed
• To explore the potential importance of carbon cycle
feedbacks in the climate system, explicit treatment of
the carbon cycle has been introduced in a few climate
AOGCMs and some Earth System Models of Intermediate
Complexity (EMICs).
• Earth System Models of Intermediate Complexity
have been evaluated in greater depth than previously.
Coordinated intercomparisons have demonstrated that
these models are useful in addressing questions involving
long time scales or requiring a large number of ensemble
simulations or sensitivity experiments.

89 scientists from across the globe were involved in the evaluation

CarbonBrief followed up with an assessment (https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-well-have-climate-models-projected-global-warming) in 2017

Blunderbuss
27-09-2019, 05:18 PM
Exegesis: a-climate-modeller-spills-the-beans (https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2019/09/a-climate-modeller-spills-the-beans/)

Not sure getting your climate science from the Quadrant is a good idea. According to my handy media bias chart it’s poor quality and farther right than the Daily Mail who knew that was possible.

3892

idledim
27-09-2019, 06:34 PM
Not sure getting your climate science from the Quadrant is a good idea. According to my handy media bias chart it’s poor quality and farther right than the Daily Mail who knew that was possible.

3892

Quadrant is a quality publication with a long tradition of excellence. In this instance, Tony Thomas' article pointed me to a publication by a Japanese climate scientist - which I read. Following that, I asked the forum if it could comment on his argument - which 'seems' similar to the IPCC argument that long-term climate predictions are inherently problematic because of the technical impossibility of accurate simulation. That's all! I get my information on most things from varied sources. It will probably be more helpful if those who have a problem with Mototaka's arguments responded directly to them - rather than lecturing me about media bias. Of course, your handy media bias is a work in itself. What a shame it's given without attribution - I'm sure I'd find its breeding quite amusing.

Still, we can all sleep easier knowing that there's no such thing as a right-leaning quality publication! There are only left-leaning quality publications - like the Saturday Paper, which is printed on Thursdays; or The Conversation, which is so confident in its climate science that it has officially blocked dissenting views!

Blunderbuss
27-09-2019, 09:19 PM
What a shame it's given without attribution - I'm sure I'd find its breeding quite amusing.

The image is from Reddit https://www.reddit.com/r/australia/comments/8vgokb/australia_media_bias_chart/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/australia/comments/8vgokb/australia_media_bias_chart/)

It seems you can make your own https://www.adfontesmedia.com/interactive-media-bias-chart/ (https://www.adfontesmedia.com/interactive-media-bias-chart/)

ER
28-09-2019, 05:04 AM
https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2019/sep/25/greta-thunberg-wins-alternative-nobel-environmental-work-guo-jianmei-right-livelihood-awards

not a bad pay packet for Greta and there's more to come! :)


"I am part of a global movement of school children, youth and adults of all ages who have decided to act in defence of our living planet. I share this award with them.”

haha rejoice Chess Chat's climate warming dummies! Your share of the spoils is due soon! :D :P

Capablanca-Fan
28-09-2019, 08:04 AM
The image is from Reddit https://www.reddit.com/r/australia/comments/8vgokb/australia_media_bias_chart/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/australia/comments/8vgokb/australia_media_bias_chart/)]

OK, so why should we believe Reddit? It puts a few left-leaning outfits in the centrist column.

Here is a media bias site that does agree that Quadrant is right-biased (https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/?s=quadrant), but not in their lists of Questionable Sources or Conspiracy/Pseudoscience. According to this Media Bias Fact Check site on Right Bias sites:


These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy.

Here is this site on the Australian version of ABC (https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/abc-news-australia/):


LEFT-CENTER BIAS
These media sources have a slight to moderate liberal bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes) to favor liberal causes. These sources are generally trustworthy for information, but may require further investigation.

Capablanca-Fan
28-09-2019, 08:06 AM
The Tragedy of Greta Thunberg (https://townhall.com/columnists/davidharsanyi/2019/09/27/the-tragedy-of-greta-thunberg-n2553787)
David Harsanyi, 27 Sep 2019

Sixteen-year-old Swedish climate change activist Greta Thunberg lives in the healthiest, wealthiest, safest and most peaceful era humans have ever known. She is one of the luckiest people ever to have lived.

In a just world, Thunberg would be at the United Nations thanking capitalist countries for bequeathing her this remarkable inheritance. Instead, she, like millions of other indoctrinated kids her age, act as if they live in a uniquely broken world on the precipice of disaster. This is a tragedy.

"You have stolen my dreams and my childhood with your empty words," Thunberg lectured the world. And maybe she's right. We've failed her by raising a generation of pagans who've filled the vacuum left by the absence of faith, not with rationality, but with a cultish worship of Mother Earth and the state. Although, to be fair, the Bible-thumping evangelical's moral certitude is nothing but a rickety edifice compared to the moral conviction of a Greta Thunberg.

It's not, of course, her fault. Adults have spent a year creating a 16-year-old because her soundbites comport with their belief system. It was "something about her raw honesty around a message of blunt-force fear (that) turned this girl from invisible to global," says CNN in a news report about a child with a narrow, age-appropriate grasp of the world.

It's the fault of media that constantly ignores overwhelming evidence that, on balance, climate change isn't undermining human flourishing. By nearly every quantifiable measure, in fact, we are better off because of fossil fuels. Though there is no way to measure the human spirit, I'm afraid.

Thunberg might do well to sail her stern gaze and billowing anger to India or China and wag her finger at the billions of people who no longer want to live in poverty and destitution. Because if climate change is irreversible in the next 10–12 years, as cultists claim, it can be blamed in large part on the historic growth we've seen in developing nations.

China's emissions from aviation and maritime trade alone are twice that of the United States, and more than the entire emissions of most nations in the world. But, sure, let's ban straws as an act of contrition.

Ian Murray
28-09-2019, 08:39 AM
THE GRETA THUNBERG PROBLEM, so many men freaking out about the tiny Swedish climate demon (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/sep/27/the-greta-thunberg-problem-so-many-men-freaking-out-about-the-tiny-swedish-climate-demon?utm_term=RWRpdG9yaWFsX0ZpcnN0RG9nT25UaGVNb29 uLTE5MDkyNw%3D%3D&utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=FirstDogOnTheMoon&CMP=firstdog_email)
First Dog on the Moon
27.9.19

antichrist
28-09-2019, 08:46 AM
The Tragedy of Greta Thunberg (https://townhall.com/columnists/davidharsanyi/2019/09/27/the-tragedy-of-greta-thunberg-n2553787)
David Harsanyi, 27 Sep 2019

Sixteen-year-old Swedish climate change activist Greta Thunberg lives in the healthiest, wealthiest, safest and most peaceful era humans have ever known. She is one of the luckiest people ever to have lived.

In a just world, Thunberg would be at the United Nations thanking capitalist countries for bequeathing her this remarkable inheritance. Instead, she, like millions of other indoctrinated kids her age, act as if they live in a uniquely broken world on the precipice of disaster. This is a tragedy.

"You have stolen my dreams and my childhood with your empty words," Thunberg lectured the world. And maybe she's right. We've failed her by raising a generation of pagans who've filled the vacuum left by the absence of faith, not with rationality, but with a cultish worship of Mother Earth and the state. Although, to be fair, the Bible-thumping evangelical's moral certitude is nothing but a rickety edifice compared to the moral conviction of a Greta Thunberg.

It's not, of course, her fault. Adults have spent a year creating a 16-year-old because her soundbites comport with their belief system. It was "something about her raw honesty around a message of blunt-force fear (that) turned this girl from invisible to global," says CNN in a news report about a child with a narrow, age-appropriate grasp of the world.

It's the fault of media that constantly ignores overwhelming evidence that, on balance, climate change isn't undermining human flourishing. By nearly every quantifiable measure, in fact, we are better off because of fossil fuels. Though there is no way to measure the human spirit, I'm afraid.

Thunberg might do well to sail her stern gaze and billowing anger to India or China and wag her finger at the billions of people who no longer want to live in poverty and destitution. Because if climate change is irreversible in the next 10–12 years, as cultists claim, it can be blamed in large part on the historic growth we've seen in developing nations.

China's emissions from aviation and maritime trade alone are twice that of the United States, and more than the entire emissions of most nations in the world. But, sure, let's ban straws as an act of contrition.


The do nothing side does not want to do anything to control excessive population, they are against birth control, they deride China and India for causing all the pollution but don't admit that it is due to their over population that the pollution is being caused. The USA stopped contributing to UN funding of birth control measures because then included abortion. The same bods here who are against social welfare and crime in wanting individuals to be responsible for themselves but won't take responsible for their own pollution and the capitalist/consumerist world that is the framework for the pollution. Why should other people have to suffer due to our capitalist/consumerist world?

Ian Murray
28-09-2019, 10:21 AM
The Tragedy of Greta Thunberg (https://townhall.com/columnists/davidharsanyi/2019/09/27/the-tragedy-of-greta-thunberg-n2553787)
David Harsanyi, 27 Sep 2019

...By nearly every quantifiable measure, in fact, we are better off because of fossil fuels. …

It does not necessarily follow that we will always be better off because of fossil fuels. In fact science is telling us that we now have to change course to avert catastrophe.

antichrist
28-09-2019, 11:04 AM
It does not necessarily follow that we will always be better off because of fossil fuels. In fact science is telling us that we now have to change course to avert catastrophe.
In the name of the holy dollar (pound sorry) they sold pig iron to the Japanese so they could make guns to attack is with. So why should we expect any better now

Patrick Byrom
28-09-2019, 11:17 AM
OK, so why should we believe Reddit? It puts a few left-leaning outfits in the centrist column.
Here is a media bias site that does agree that Quadrant is right-biased (https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/?s=quadrant), but not in their lists of Questionable Sources or Conspiracy/Pseudoscience. According to this Media Bias Fact Check site on Right Bias sites: ...

These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy.
So you're saying that Quadrant can't be trusted - got it! The article that idleim posted included a global conspiracy theory that climate scientists are fudging the temperature data (even though it's freely available on the internet!). It's clearly pseudoscience.

MichaelBaron
28-09-2019, 11:40 AM
https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2019/sep/25/greta-thunberg-wins-alternative-nobel-environmental-work-guo-jianmei-right-livelihood-awards

not a bad pay packet for Greta and there's more to come! :)



haha rejoice Chess Chat's climate warming dummies! Your share of the spoils is due soon! :D :P

Share the award with them....may be Greta can also share her food with hungry 3d world Children. They may appreciate more!

Patrick Byrom
28-09-2019, 11:48 AM
Share the award with them....may be Greta can also share her food with hungry 3d world Children. They may appreciate more!I think we should all be sharing our food with hungry people. I assume that you regularly donate to help the homeless in Victoria?

idledim
28-09-2019, 03:44 PM
So you're saying that Quadrant can't be trusted - got it! The article that idleim posted included a global conspiracy theory that climate scientists are fudging the temperature data (even though it's freely available on the internet!). It's clearly pseudoscience.

http://iprc.soest.hawaii.edu/people/nakamura.php

Here is a sample from Mototaka's essay - mostly on ocean dynamics and water vapour. As I've said before, a direct response to his arguments will probably be more helpful than demonisation - especially when the demonisers are aiming at the wrong target! The extract is part of an English appendix to his monograph (which is written in Japanese). It costs $1.20, but is free with a kindle unlimited account - and kindle unlimited accounts are free for the first 30 days - so there's no excuse!

Albedo is a fancy term for the planetary reflectivity of the solar radiation. The ice-albedo feedback, in an extremely simplified fashion, works like this: lower temperature in the middle- and high-latitude regions results in more ice and snow cover in the regions, thereby increasing the albedo of the regions, which in turn further lowers the temperature in the regions and increases the ice and snow cover, and vice versa. In other words, it is a vicious cycle that tends to change middle- and high-latitude climate, given a minor perturbation in the region's temperature and/or albedo, in the direction nudged by the initial perturbation. This process plays the dominant role in the major warming in high-latitude regions produced by climate simulation models in scenarios of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide. Without a reasonably accurate representation of the ice-albedo feedback, it is impossible to make any meaningful prediction of climate variations and changes in the middle- and high-latitudes and, thus, the entire planet. One might argue that it wouldn't matter in a very long run, if the carbon dioxide emission continues to increase. It does matter, because the terrestrial and oceanic biogeochemical processes that control the atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration are dependent on the temperature, among other factors, and are highly nonlinear.

Needless to say, oceans interact with the atmosphere in complex ways and generate short-, medium-, and long-term variations in weather patterns and climate. These variations, especially those in the middle- and high-latitudes, are actually integral parts of climate changes of much longer time scales. These variations may appear to be cyclical individually, but can exert non-cyclical effects on the climate system due to myriad of feedbacks, an important one of which is the aforementioned ice-albedo feedback, among all the components of the system. The oceanic flows, thus, can exert very strong impacts on variations and changes in climate through their enormous heat transport of their own and also through their strong influence on the atmospheric heat transport. I stress here again that the ocean is one of the most important components of the climate system and that it is absolutely crucial to represent the state and actions of oceans reasonably accurately in climate models if the models are to be used for any meaningful prediction.

Climate researchers used to downplay the significance of interactions between the large-scale atmosphere and oceans in the middle and high latitudes, based on many experiments using coarse-resolution climate simulation models that are hopeless in capturing the atmospheric response to the underlying oceanic temperature structures and analyses of these experiments with mostly linear statistical methods in simple frameworks. They had missed important factors in the large-scale atmosphere-ocean interactions in the extra-tropics (middle and high latitudes) — importance of the spatial position of the westerly jet stream with respect to the areas of large horizontal temperature gradient (contrast) in the oceans and high horizontal resolutions required for capturing effects of the oceanic temperature structures — and grossly underestimated the oceanic impacts on the large-scale atmospheric states. I was not convinced at all by their argument that the extra-tropical atmosphere-ocean interactions are not as significant as those in the tropics, and managed to reveal a tiny tip of this huge iceberg in publications 13, 14, 16, 17, and18 in the list of my publications. I would argue that the interactions that involve areas of oceans with significant downward motions, e.g., Greenland Sea and Labrador Sea, are the most difficult to simulate with models because of the significant roles played by non-hydrostatic dynamics in the oceans that are not calculated in climate models.

In the real oceans, the most energetic part of the flows that does the most of mixing and transport of heat and various materials is of small- to medium-scales, roughly in a range from a few kilometers to a few hundred kilometers. This part of the oceanic flows is explicitly calculated and represented reasonably well in ocean simulation models that have a horizontal resolution of 0.1˚x0.1˚ or higher in longitude and latitude. It is not, however, calculated in oceanic component of climate simulation models that have been used for predictions, since these models have horizontal resolutions of 0.5˚x0.5˚ or coarser. In those models, only the net effects of this important part of the oceanic flows are estimated by parametric representations that derive the net effects from the large-scale state of the ocean that can be explicitly calculated by the models.

I hate to say this, because I know well how much of serious efforts have been put into improving these parametric representations (I spent hundreds of hours in vain myself), but all of these parametric representations, even the best of them, are Mickey Mouse mockeries when compared with the reality. In the real oceans, just like in the atmosphere, the smaller-scale flows often tend to counteract the effects of the larger-scale flows. So, small- to medium-scale motions exert ensemble effects on the larger-scale state in such a way that they "tighten" the larger-scale fields of flows, temperature, and salinity when and where the larger-scale flows tend to "loosen" the larger-scale fields. I found this situation occurring roughly half of the time in realistic ocean simulation output. In the oceanic component of the climate prediction models, these smaller-scale flows are required to be "diffusive" on the larger-scale fields and always tend to "loosen" the larger-scale fields. In other words, the models force the smaller-scale flows to be diffusive even when and where the smaller-scale flows should decay and transfer "energy" (strictly speaking, "energy" is not the correct word, but the best choice to help the reader grasp the picture) up to the larger-scale flow and act in an anti-diffusive manner.

Of course, since the effects of the smaller-scale flows are anti-diffusive about half of the time, this strictly-diffusive representation of the effects of the smaller-scale flows results in a grotesque distortion of the mixing and transport of momentum, heat, and salt, thereby making the behavior of the climate simulation models utterly unrealistic. Not only is the strictly-diffusive qualitative aspect of the representations wrong, but also the quantitative aspect of the representations, the strength of mixing and transport, is an ad hoc "model tuning tool". Parameters that determine the strength of mixing and transport by the smaller-scale flows are selected to "tune" the model without adhering to numbers estimated from observations or high-resolution model output. That is, the selection of the parameter values is an engineering process to "make the model work" rather than a scientific process. The models are "tuned" by tinkering around with values of various parameters until the best compromise is obtained. I used to do it myself. It is a necessary and unavoidable procedure and is not a problem so long as the user is aware of its ramifications and is honest about it. But it is a serious and fatal flaw if it is used for climate forecasting/prediction purposes.

I used to hear moronic statements such as "The model manages to produce large-scale oceanic states that resemble the observed and, so, should be good enough for climate predictions." from some ocean modelers. It is nonsense. Even if the best compromise so obtained from the tuning looks very close to the observation, the models' behaviors are guaranteed to be grotesquely unrealistic, since the tuning requires other aspects of the models to be extremely distorted in order to counterbalance the distortion associated with the Mickey Mouse representations described above. (Atmospheric modeling community has been well aware that the models must capture the average large-scale state and variations around it in order for them to be useful for any meaningful prediction.) The oceanic component used in those climate models does not generate realistic variability at all, perhaps except for the El Nino in the tropics. Thus, changes and variations in climate predicted by those models are completely meaningless even if they were tuned to reproduce the current climate very accurately. By the way, none of the climate simulation models used for predictions can reproduce the current climate accurately despite the heavy tuning and engineering efforts by climate researchers. The models are tuned to produce the "best compromise" and used for various experiments.

The root cause of this intractable problem lies on the fundamental requirement for the models to run without failing. It is simply impossible to make these models represent the net effect of the smaller-scale flows in any realistic manner. (I have presented and discussed this issue in publications 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, and 12 in the list of my publications.) Hopefully, quantum computers will eliminate this problem in the future. However, when the computers become so much more powerful than the present supercomputers and acquire a capability to run super-high resolution climate simulation models, climate researchers will most likely encounter serious difficulty in tuning the models to their liking and in interpreting the simulation results, since the realistic oceanic flows will undoubtedly introduce into the models realistic feedbacks between smaller-scale flows and larger-scale flows in the oceans, and, if a similarly high resolution is used for the atmospheric models as well, also complex interactions between the extra-tropical atmosphere and oceans. Those feedbacks/interactions will generate much higher complexity in slowly- and very-slowly-evolving aspects of the simulated climate and will confuse many of the climate researchers who are used to seeing grotesquely simplified and smoothed behaviors of the climate system in climate simulations conducted thus far. The real or realistically-simulated climate system is far more complex than an absurdly simple system simulated by the toys that have been used for climate predictions to date, and will be insurmountably difficult to deal with for those naive climate researchers who have zero or very limited understanding of geophysical fluid dynamics. I understand geophysical fluid dynamics just a little, but enough to realize that the dynamics of the atmosphere and oceans are absolutely critical facets of the climate system if one hopes to ever make any meaningful prediction of climate variations and changes.

I want to emphasize, however, that elimination of the problem described above alone WILL NOT make the climate simulation models fit for making meaning predictions, although it will make the models extremely useful tools to study dynamics of the atmosphere-ocean system, because of myriad of other important processes that are inadequately represented or ignored in climate simulation models.

Another major contributor to the predicted major global warming is water vapor, the most important greenhouse gas in the Earth's atmosphere. Actually, a large portion of the major global warming predicted by those climate prediction toys is attributed to increases in the atmospheric water vapor concentration, not the increased atmospheric carbon dioxide.

The atmospheric water vapor plays a crucial role in the climate system in several ways. Most of the people who have studied the global warming issue probably know about its strong greenhouse effect, that is, its role as a radiation absorber/emitter. Its radiative forcing in the present climate dwarfs that of the atmospheric carbon dioxide. The enhanced warming effect of its changes predicted by the climate simulation models also dwarfs that of the projected carbon dioxide increase. So, predicting changes in the radiative forcing associated with the atmospheric water vapor accurately is essential for any meaningful prediction of climate changes. But the fact is this: all climate simulation models perform poorly in reproducing the atmospheric water vapor and its radiative forcing observed in the current climate.

This difficulty stems from, among several major factors, large spatial and temporal variations in the water vapor concentration. Unlike other trace greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, water vapor plays a critical and active role in atmospheric motions of all scales and directions and readily changes its phase from gas to liquid (water) or solid (ice), and vice versa. Energy release/absorption associated with these phase changes is one of the most important factors that drive the climate system. Since water and ice can be removed from the atmosphere by precipitation, accurately simulating atmospheric motions that bring these phase changes is a prerequisite for reasonably accurate simulation of climate, not to mention prediction of climate variations and changes. It is a basic knowledge to anyone who has studied the weather at any level that formation of cloud and precipitation are mostly associated with vertical motions of the atmosphere. The atmospheric water vapor actually plays an active role in these vertical motions as well and is not a passive tracer gas, which complicates the issue further. Needless to say, reasonably accurate computation of the vertical motions or effects of the vertical motions on water vapor is absolutely essential if one hopes to calculate the atmospheric water vapor distribution with reasonable accuracy.

Here is an important fact: climate simulation models cannot calculate the vertical motions and only diagnose a miniscule portion of the vertical motions from changes in the large scale state of the atmosphere which is calculated by the models. In order to allow the models to calculate the vertical motions, we must remove the so-called "hydrostatic approximation" from the climate models, which would require an enormous enhancement in the computational power. It is simply not feasible, probably not even with the advent of quantum computers. So, then, how do they come up with the water vapor distribution in a vertical atmospheric column? The models use various parametric representations that estimate the water vapor profiles from the large-scale atmospheric state that can be calculated by the models. All but one of these parametric representations are ad hoc and rely on major simplifying assumptions that are not justifiable when scrutinized against the reality. They have only a few parameters that can be used to "tune" the performance of the models and utterly unrealistic. I had many discussions on this topic with Professor Nilton Renno during my graduate student days when he was my officemate, and became very much intrigued by the ramifications of these parametric representations in climate simulation.

Most of these parametric representations employ procedures that adjust the atmospheric water vapor content in a vertical column by using as references certain smooth profiles derived from averaging relative humidity profiles over the globe or over very large areas and over very long periods of time, and have nothing to do with instantaneous physical processes. They do offer a major benefit for scientific research because one wishes to simplify unknown or intractably complex aspects of a system as much as possible in order to focus on the topic of research for scientific investigation. However, they are detrimental for making reliable forecasts or predictions. In the case of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide, the use of relative humidity as the variable of control target creates artificially forced extra warming arising from the increase in the maximum water vapor content in the atmosphere, as the maximum water vapor that can be contained in the atmosphere increases exponentially with temperature. Now, relative humidity is a percent ratio of the water vapor contained in the atmosphere to the maximum water vapor amount that can be contained in the atmosphere at a given temperature and pressure. So, if a model were to have the same relative humidity regardless of changes in other aspects of the atmosphere, then, for a minor warming caused by an increased amount of carbon dioxide, the artificially imposed condition on the relative humidity would generate some extra warming due to an increase in the water vapor amount, which would tend to further raise the atmospheric temperature and water vapor content, creating a vicious cycle between the atmospheric water vapor and temperature. This positive feedback itself is not fictitious. But, in climate models, it is artificially enforced to operate without interference by other feedbacks that exist in the real climate system, and is very likely to be exaggerated. It is this feedback that generates major increases in the surface temperature when the atmospheric carbon dioxide is increased in climate simulation models. The vertical profile of the atmospheric water vapor produced by these parametric representations do not compare well at all with the observation, except when averages over a large area or over a long period are compared. One might think that the parametric schemes work fine for climate simulation, if such averages compare well with the observation, since the target of the simulation is not the daily forecasts. They do not, because of the nonlinear relationship between the water vapor concentration and its warming effect, which I will discuss a little more in detail later.

As far as I know, the only physics-based parametric representation of water vapor content usable in climate simulation models is the so-called "Emanuel scheme", developed by Professor Kerry Emanuel. The scheme is based on solid physical theories and has a number of parameters whose values are constrained to some degree by observational data and/or theories. So, the Emanuel scheme is far superior to others in theory, but still suffers from limitations that arise from simplifying assumptions and a lack of sufficient observational data to constrain the value of the parameters. I liked it the best among all parametric representation methods available for vertical motions and precipitations in climate models, and attempted to improve it by making one of its parameters ("precipitation efficiency", if I recall it correctly) a variable that depends on the vertical shear in the horizontal wind. I had the modification implemented in the Atmospheric model For the Earth Simulator (AFES) by a colleague of mine at the Earth Simulator Center in 2003 or 2004. The modification, to my disappointment, did not improve the model performance significantly. It was only one of a number of parameters used in the scheme. I suppose that making only one of them a function of the large-scale state was not enough to make a substantial impact on the model's performance. So, reproducing the observed vertical profiles of the atmospheric water vapor reasonably realistically is an insurmountable task for all climate models, which is to say that the models are not capable of simulating the vertical radiative forcing profiles with reasonable accuracy.

The ad hoc treatment of the vertical water vapor distribution is not the only major problem associated with this most important greenhouse gas. Methods to calculate its horizontal distribution are laced with a grave problem also. It is rooted in the treatment of effects of sub-grid (too small to be calculated explicitly in climate models) motions on the water vapor. The climate simulation models can calculate most of the important part of the horizontal wind. This fact makes the atmospheric component of the climate models much better than the oceanic component, as the transports of materials and heat in the atmosphere are explicitly calculated. However, in order for the models to operate without failing, fine structures and sharp boundaries between areas of high and low concentration of materials and temperature must be eliminated, that is, smoothing of all fields are required. This "smoothing" is accomplished by a procedure called "diffusion" that is designed to mimic the effects of sub-grid wind on the concentration fields and forces materials and heat to "seep out" from areas of higher concentration to adjacent areas of lower concentration. The greater is the gradient (difference per unit distance) in the concentration, the larger is the amount of this "seeping out". In the real atmosphere, this diffusion is observed in some cases but not always. The water vapor field, in particular, is often observed to have very sharp boundaries between areas/layers of high concentration and areas/layers of low concentration.

Patrick Byrom
28-09-2019, 04:22 PM
http://iprc.soest.hawaii.edu/people/nakamura.php
Here is a sample from Mototaka's essay - mostly on ocean dynamics and water vapour. As I've said before, a direct response to his arguments will probably be more helpful than demonisation - especially when the demonisers are aiming at the wrong target! The extract is part of an English appendix to his monograph (which is written in Japanese). It costs $1.20, but is free with a kindle unlimited account - and kindle unlimited accounts are free for the first 30 days - so there's no excuse!How can I respond to claims by Nakamura about climate models, when he is also claiming that there is a huge global conspiracy to distort the temperature data - without providing any evidence? Before we can even start to discuss models, we need to agree on what the data is, because the models are benchmarked against the data. His claims don't match the data, which is enough evidence for me to reject them.

So let's discuss a more basic issue first. Do you agree that the global temperature data set is reliable? Or do you agree with Nakamura that it has been corrupted by scientists? You've previously posted claims that it has been corrupted, but I'm still waiting for you to respond to the refutation of those claims by roadrunner and myself.

Then we can discuss whether you agree with my argument that if we continue to increase the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, the global temperature will continue to increase, as predicted by the laws of physics - no climate computer models (or 'big data') necessary!

Once we've settled these issues, we can start to worry about the fine details of climate models.

idledim
28-09-2019, 04:47 PM
How can I respond to claims by Nakamura about climate models, when he is also claiming that there is a huge global conspiracy to distort the temperature data - without providing any evidence? Before we can even start to discuss models, we need to agree on what the data is, because the models are benchmarked against the data. His claims don't match the data, which is enough evidence for me to reject them.

So let's discuss a more basic issue first. Do you agree that the global temperature data set is reliable? Or do you agree with Nakamura that it has been corrupted by scientists? You've previously posted claims that it has been corrupted, but I'm still waiting for you to respond to the refutation of those claims by roadrunner and myself.

Then we can discuss whether you agree with my argument that if we continue to increase the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, the global temperature will continue to increase, as predicted by the laws of physics - no climate computer models (or 'big data') necessary!

Once we've settled these issues, we can start to worry about the fine details of climate models.

But how can you respond to anything he's written until you've read it? How can you know anything about the evidence if you haven't read it? Nakamura makes it very clear in the foreword that he isn't a 'climate change skeptic.' He also looks forward to the day when quantum computing might solve some of the problems with simulation models. Whether we like it or not, simulation models are being used to predict the coming climate. They are the mechanism the IPCC relies on to speak with greater or lesser confidence about the veracity of Greta's apocalyptic, dystopian vision. I think it's pretty obvious that direct responses to Mototaka's objections is preferable to demonisation . One might even say, with Greta, 'how dare you?" Anyway, here is the final paragraph from the Appendix:

The take-home message from the above discussion is this: all climate simulation models, even those with the best parametric representation scheme for convective motions and cloud, suffer from a very large degree of arbitrariness in the representation of processes that determine the atmospheric water vapor and cloud fields. Since the climate models are tuned arbitrarily to produce the time-averaged atmospheric water vapor field and cloud coverage that best resemble the observed climatological ones, but still fail to reproduce the observed fields (especially miserably when the instantaneous field and temporal variability are examined), there is no reason to trust their predictions/forecasts. With values of parameters that are supposed to represent many complex processes being held constant, many nonlinear processes in the real climate system are absent or grossly distorted in the models. It is a delusion to believe that simulation models that lack important nonlinear processes in the real climate system can predict at least the sense or direction of the climate change correctly.

Ian Murray
28-09-2019, 04:57 PM
But how can you respond to anything he's written until you've read it? How can you know anything about the evidence if you haven't read it? Nakamura makes it very clear in the foreword that he isn't a 'climate change skeptic.' He also looks forward to the day when quantum computing might solve some of the problems with simulation models. Whether we like it or not, simulation models are being used to predict the coming climate. They are the mechanism the IPCC relies on to speak with greater or lesser confidence about the veracity of Greta's apocalyptic, dystopian vision. I think it's pretty obvious that direct responses to Mototaka's objections is preferable to demonisation . One might even say, with Greta, 'how dare you?" Anyway, here is the final paragraph from the Appendix:

The take-home message from the above discussion is this: all climate simulation models, even those with the best parametric representation scheme for convective motions and cloud, suffer from a very large degree of arbitrariness in the representation of processes that determine the atmospheric water vapor and cloud fields. Since the climate models are tuned arbitrarily to produce the time-averaged atmospheric water vapor field and cloud coverage that best resemble the observed climatological ones, but still fail to reproduce the observed fields (especially miserably when the instantaneous field and temporal variability are examined), there is no reason to trust their predictions/forecasts. With values of parameters that are supposed to represent many complex processes being held constant, many nonlinear processes in the real climate system are absent or grossly distorted in the models. It is a delusion to believe that simulation models that lack important nonlinear processes in the real climate system can predict at least the sense or direction of the climate change correctly.

The fact remains that current climate models, when tested by hindcasting, "predict" past climate conditions closely enough to confirm their reliability.

Blunderbuss
28-09-2019, 05:01 PM
Amazon reviewer seems to have nailed it...

The predictive capability of climate change models has been an issue from the first use of such models. That's why so much effort has been put into checking model results against actual events. The result: the models are better at prediction than randomly guessing. In some areas (e.g., temperature change, sea level rise) the models are extremely accurate. Scarily so. At best the book should be calling for continued verification and data collection in all the variables of climate change. Right now the models and the data being collected to verify them are the best resources we have for dealing with climate change and its consequences.

Ian Murray
28-09-2019, 05:12 PM
Kerry O'Brien speaks out

https://www.facebook.com/abc/videos/337050337069911/?t=2

Patrick Byrom
28-09-2019, 05:49 PM
But how can you respond to anything he's written until you've read it? How can you know anything about the evidence if you haven't read it? Nakamura makes it very clear in the foreword that he isn't a 'climate change skeptic.' He also looks forward to the day when quantum computing might solve some of the problems with simulation models. Whether we like it or not, simulation models are being used to predict the coming climate. They are the mechanism the IPCC relies on to speak with greater or lesser confidence about the veracity of Greta's apocalyptic, dystopian vision. I think it's pretty obvious that direct responses to Mototaka's objections is preferable to demonisation . One might even say, with Greta, 'how dare you?" Anyway, here is the final paragraph from the Appendix: ... But I have responded. I pointed out that discussing the details of models is a waste of time when there is no apparent agreement by you on the data set being used or the laws those models are based on.

You also don't seem to understand the actual purpose of climate models. They are not used to predict that the temperature will increase as more carbon dioxide is added to the atmosphere - we know that from the laws of physics. They are used to understand the details of the changes caused by the increases in temperature. So Thunberg's concerns are not based on climate models; they are based on the laws of physics. If you agree with the laws of physics, then you will be worried about a future where we do not limit the amount of carbon dioxide we are adding to the atmosphere. Do you agree with the laws of physics?

ER
28-09-2019, 06:17 PM
https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2019/sep/25/greta-thunberg-wins-alternative-nobel-environmental-work-guo-jianmei-right-livelihood-awards

not a bad pay packet for Greta and there's more to come! :)

haha rejoice Chess Chat's climate warming dummies! Your share of the spoils is due soon! :D :P


Share the award with them....may be Greta can also share her food with hungry 3d world Children. They may appreciate more!

Michael looks like the entrepreneurial Mr. Greta's dad, has struck gold after so many years of not so successful efforts!
Do you really think that he and his daughter would give a hoot about the hungry 3rd world children? :D :P

Ian Murray
28-09-2019, 06:45 PM
3897

MichaelBaron
28-09-2019, 08:44 PM
Michael looks like the entrepreneurial Mr. Greta's dad, has struck gold after so many years of not so successful efforts!
Do you really think that he and his daughter would give a hoot about the hungry 3rd world children? :D :P
True...
Good example though how one can earn money while young!
Why work at a service station/McDondalds if one can simply fight for the planet instead ...and its far more profitable

Ian Murray
29-09-2019, 07:03 AM
You gotta laugh

The Internet Is Loving The Greta Thunberg Helpline For Adults Angry At A Child (https://www.iflscience.com/environment/the-internet-is-loving-the-greta-thunberg-helpline-for-adults-angry-at-a-child/)
IFLScience

antichrist
29-09-2019, 07:55 AM
The re-action to her reminds me of chess dads who never play chess again after being defeated by their 10 year old child - how childish of them I used to think. As I taught chess to children it is surprising how often I heard that sad message. Are they any better than King Herod who had all the one year olds killed because they could not stand the competition?

Capablanca-Fan
29-09-2019, 10:28 AM
The GretaMessiah without a script:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bwLt_5t73g

But I blame the activists more for using and scaring this already obsessive-compulsive child.

Capablanca-Fan
29-09-2019, 10:32 AM
Pediatrician to Climate-Change Activists: Keep Your Hands Off Our Kids (https://www.lifezette.com/2019/09/pediatrician-climate-change-hands-off-kids)
Shame on the adults, says a physician who has cared for thousands of children in her career; people who should've known better allowed a teen and others to carry the burdens of the world
BY MEG MEEKER, MD, 24 Sep 2019

Here’s the saddest part of the entire event: The young teen will suffer more than most who listened. Her voice shook with a mixture of fear, anger and anguish as she passionately told her audience that her future had been ruined by a bunch of greedy, selfish adults in the generation that preceded her.

Furthermore, as she strategically shamed a room full of adults, she fed into every child’s fear of his or her own future.

To each and every adult responsible for allowing Greta Thunberg to speak: Shame on you, I say. The 16-year-old- girl from Sweden went before the U.N. and reprimanded adults in the audience for their part in ruining her life — not because she had extensive knowledge of the subject, but because she was very good at parroting her parents’ and teachers’ beliefs. Adults essentially threw this girl under the bus in order to advance a political agenda.

As a pediatrician who has seen hundreds of kids struggle with anxiety and depression at alarmingly high rates, young Greta’s address further fueled kids’ feelings that they should be anxious, too. After all, their futures have been destroyed — she told them that.

Our job as adults is to quell our children’s fears — not to allow their anxiety to be worsened. Kids have plenty to be anxious about in today’s world. They feel pressure to excel academically, athletically, to figure out at an early age whether they are a boy or girl, to understand their sexual orientation, fight against bullies, avoid drinking, having sex or using drugs, etc. They live frenetic lives with minimal downtime — and they rarely see their parents because they’re so busy doing wonderful things.

I was a child during the Cuban missile crisis. My family lived in Washington, D.C, and while I rehearsed bomb drills in school, I was excited to go for a trip to Boston for the week when President John F. Kennedy negotiated our way out of a disastrous event.

But it was only as an adult that I realized the seriousness of the situation and the reason for our sudden trip to Boston. My parents were doing their best to keep us away from harm by a launched missile. They took charge of a dealing with such a serious event — and kept fear away from us kids. Let them be children. Let’s not dump adult problems on their shoulders — because in doing so, we directly contribute to harming their mental health.

MichaelBaron
29-09-2019, 10:51 AM
The GretaMessiah without a script:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bwLt_5t73g

But I blame the activists more for using and scaring this already obsessive-compulsive child.
For a person with a range of ''conditions'' she is doing pretty well actually..

Ian Murray
29-09-2019, 12:03 PM
Pediatrician to Climate-Change Activists: Keep Your Hands Off Our Kids (https://www.lifezette.com/2019/09/pediatrician-climate-change-hands-off-kids)
Shame on the adults, says a physician who has cared for thousands of children in her career; people who should've known better allowed a teen and others to carry the burdens of the world
BY MEG MEEKER, MD, 24 Sep 2019

When adults realize that big issues like climate change belong to adults — not kids — then we will do something constructive to help diminish our kids’ anxieties.


The grown-ups in charge have had over 50 years to do the realising and do something constructive. Their dereliction of that duty of care forces the next generation to take action to protect their future

Ian Murray
29-09-2019, 12:18 PM
For a person with a range of ''conditions'' she is doing pretty well actually..

Back at Post #4866 you said:


Too complex...
But as there are at least 3 conditions that she has been ''officially'' diagnosed with...with look into those conditions

At Post $4867 I asked:


Oh? And those three are?

You did not reply, but still you claim she has a range of conditions. You can't disparage people like that with false statements - she is entitled to her dignity

Ian Murray
29-09-2019, 12:29 PM
The GretaMessiah without a script:....

Actually she normally ad libs pretty well at press conferences, e.g.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxm32LavAMI

Capablanca-Fan
29-09-2019, 12:31 PM
Brings back memories of an old show as well as failed predictions over the last 50 years:
Thunbergs are go!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-crRZ9jrJk&t=08&fbclid=IwAR2XnItoBqMbbZXyhBDLM6jscLe-N-3xMSKLRRtyh2IpGK1ZBN-G6bTl6X0

antichrist
29-09-2019, 12:36 PM
Now my mate Capa Fan, with full freedom you have chosen not to respond to my post questioning do we have the right to annihilate God's creatures. Surely God did not put them here for us to wipe out one way or another. We are placing ourselves above God.

Patrick Byrom
29-09-2019, 01:42 PM
You did not reply, but still you claim she has a range of conditions. You can't disparage people like that with false statements - she is entitled to her dignityUnfortunately, that is standard practice for the 'ignorers' - you can't even describe them as 'rejectors', as they don't even look at the refutations of what they post. Concisely described on another blog (https://andthentheresphysics.wordpress.com/2019/09/18/moderation-at-the-conversation/):

... You can’t have rational discussion of opinions if one side refuses to admit when they are wrong, or refuses to answer questions that clarify their position, or ask questions and do nothing with the answers, or repeatedly raise points that have already been addressed etc.

Ian Murray
29-09-2019, 05:03 PM
The week Australia failed on climate change (https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/politics/2019/09/28/the-week-australia-failed-climate-change/15695928008836)
Saturday Paper
28.9.19

...At the Grimaldi Forum, which hugs the water in Monaco’s eastern beach quartier, more than 100 scientists from almost 40 countries met to debate the final wording of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) special report on oceans and ice systems. It asks a critical question: What happens to the Earth’s oceans, glaciers, surface ice and permafrost – on which a latticework of ecosystems depend – if humans fail to halt warming?

The director of the Australian National University’s Climate Change Institute, Professor Mark Howden, was in the room, going over the text word by word, line by line, into the early morning.

“We have got a problem,” he tells The Saturday Paper from Monaco. “Change is happening, it is happening quickly, and the implications are profound.”...

MichaelBaron
29-09-2019, 05:41 PM
Back at Post #4866 you said:



At Post $4867 I asked:



You did not reply, but still you claim she has a range of conditions. You can't disparage people like that with false statements - she is entitled to her dignity
Re her conditions:
Ok...here we go: she was diagnosed with Asperger syndrome,[15] obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD),[15] and selective mutism.
All of the above are recognised as mental issues.

This is not about her dignity. Everyone is entitled to dignity but the fact is...we have a person with the problems outlined above screaming at the world's leaders.

Ian Murray
29-09-2019, 06:09 PM
Re her conditions:
Ok...here we go: she was diagnosed with Asperger syndrome,[15] obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD),[15] and selective mutism.
All of the above are recognised as mental issues.

She is on the autism spectrum ([/QUOTE]), which includes all three symptoms. It is not a mental issue but a a neuro-developmental disability


This is not about her dignity. Everyone is entitled to dignity but the fact is...we have a person with the problems outlined above screaming at the world's leaders.

See, you can't help yourself. She was scolding world leaders. She was not "screaming" at them. Nor was she hysterical, as you claimed in an earlier post, while denying you had heard of her. Note that she spoke in English, when her native tongue is Swedish.

Those with severe Aspergers have serious communication difficulties (e.g. they can't speak or smile). There is a Queensland chessplayer who was like that, but a top junior player. I don't know how much better he is now, if at all, but he is reliably rated 2200+

Whatever you say, Greta's global impact is irrefutable. So is the science she relies on.

antichrist
29-09-2019, 06:51 PM
I grew up in an environment where the thinking was if it moves shoot it, needless to say there was very little wildlife around except for a few pidgons, kookaburras, peewees, magpies and ground parrots which I think may be endangered now. Then when around 12 years old the school got their hands on some posters of the birds of Australia. I immediately became an environmentalist. It did not need any scientific education or leadership of others. Some people have the same experience with a god but we will pass on that one. I meet a lot of overseas visitors in Byron Bay and they too are seduced by our wildlife. And as the saying goes you don't what you have lost till it is gone. Well that is the same with our very delicate environment that is now virtually on it's last legs.

ER
29-09-2019, 07:19 PM
I grew up in an environment where the thinking was if it moves shoot it, needless to say there was very little wildlife around except for a few pidgons, kookaburras, peewees, magpies and ground parrots which I think may be endangered now. Then when around 12 years old the school got their hands on some posters of the birds of Australia. I immediately became an environmentalist. It did not need any scientific education or leadership of others. Some people have the same experience with a god but we will pass on that one. I meet a lot of overseas visitors in Byron Bay and they too are seduced by our wildlife. And as the saying goes you don't (…?) what you have lost till it is gone. Well that is the same with our very delicate environment that is now virtually on it's last legs.

An excellent exposition of the environmental theory and practice in its simplest and most comprehensible form. In complete antithesis to your
supposedly scientifically savvy environ mental sidekicks here who with all those labyrinthic diagrams, copy and paste biased articles and meaningless yadda yadda give
your cause a bad name!

(…?) you missed the "miss" word there but ok!

ER
29-09-2019, 07:32 PM
The GretaMessiah without a script:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bwLt_5t73g

But I blame the activists more for using and scaring this already obsessive-compulsive child.

That's really sad... the child needs a break from all this; going back to school
in a healthy and joyful environment amongst her classmates, friends and teachers would definitely help!
I am afraid that being used as a guinea pig by her indoctrinating mentors the way she is now
will definitely have serious consequences on her mental and physical health.

Kevin Bonham
29-09-2019, 08:14 PM
https://youtu.be/1N29vkIT3eo

What drives you on
Can drive you mad
A million lies to sell yourself
Is all you ever had

sounds familiar? :D :P

Not, and predictably not, to the lead singer of one of my favourite bands:


Greta Thunberg is a godsend. I am also deeply shamed that my generation has failed the young and have forced them into fighting for their future instead of attending school and playing with their friends, as they should be at this point in their young lives. May their efforts not be in vain.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-49795270

Patrick Byrom
29-09-2019, 09:12 PM
An excellent exposition of the environmental theory and practice in its simplest and most comprehensible form. In complete antithesis to your
supposedly scientifically savvy environ mental sidekicks here who with all those labyrinthic diagrams, copy and paste biased articles and meaningless yadda yadda give
your cause a bad name! (…?) you missed the "miss" word there but ok!A thread on the environment generally would be an excellent idea. Unfortunately this thread is about climate change.

antichrist
29-09-2019, 10:03 PM
A thread on the environment generally would be an excellent idea. Unfortunately this thread is about climate change.

The point I was making that I was well below the ago of Greta and did not need any input from adults so why couldn't it also be the same for Greta. I was indoctrinated into the DLP (and religion) if anything - it was even from over the pulpit and I was an altar boy so I got multiple doses. The same people who think Greta was indoctrinated should regret that I was also indoctrinated at a tender age.

Ian Murray
30-09-2019, 07:58 AM
The point I was making that I was well below the ago of Greta and did not need any input from adults so why couldn't it also be the same for Greta. ...

It certainly was the same for her. She was 8yo when she became aware of the changing climate and began her career as an activist. Inter alia, she convinced her parents to become vegan and give up flying (ending her mother's career as an international opera singer).

Ian Murray
30-09-2019, 08:47 AM
We stand with Greta

http://getup.to/3EC8CZ8wuQLJ

idledim
30-09-2019, 10:52 AM
But I have responded. I pointed out that discussing the details of models is a waste of time when there is no apparent agreement by you on the data set being used or the laws those models are based on.

You also don't seem to understand the actual purpose of climate models. They are not used to predict that the temperature will increase as more carbon dioxide is added to the atmosphere - we know that from the laws of physics. They are used to understand the details of the changes caused by the increases in temperature. So Thunberg's concerns are not based on climate models; they are based on the laws of physics. If you agree with the laws of physics, then you will be worried about a future where we do not limit the amount of carbon dioxide we are adding to the atmosphere. Do you agree with the laws of physics?

The issue is not whether I agree with the laws of physics, since I simply posted a link to the work of climate scientist Mototaka Nakamura. The issue is whether he agrees with the laws of physics. His list of publications indicates that he probably does! In order to respond to Mototaka's arguments you probably need to be familiar with them. How do you know what data sets he is using, or even if his arguments depend on data sets, if you haven't made yourself familiar with them? I have tried to help by posting excerpts from his essay. They've been met with silence. If you had read Mototaka, you would know that his emphasis is not on a global conspiracy. It is on the impossibility of creating adequate simulations because of the technology that we currently possess.

Now, I must emphasize here that my skepticism on the "global warming hypothesis" is targeted on the "catastrophic" part of the hypothesis and not on the "global warming" per se. That is, there is no doubt that increased carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere does have some warming effect on the lower troposphere (about 0.5 degrees Kelvin for a doubling from the pre-industrial revolution era, according to true experts), although it has not been proven that the warming effect actually results in a rise in the global mean surface temperature, because of the extremely complex processes operating in the real climate system, many of which are represented in perfunctory manner at best or ignored altogether in climate simulation models. I also want to emphasize that I am not denying the possibility of a major climate change as a result of the human activity, either catastrophic global warming or a return of severe glacial period (the real climate system that has myriad of physical and biogeochemical processes is highly nonlinear, much more so than the toys used for climate predictions). I am simply pointing out the fact that it is impossible to predict with any degree of accuracy how the climate of this planet will change in the future. Aside from an obvious fact that we cannot predict future changes in the solar energy output, we just cannot predict, in any meaningful way, how the Earth's climate will respond to the anthropogenic increase in the atmospheric carbon dioxide with the knowledge and technology that we currently possess.

He does also indicate that there are other problems with climate simulation models that probably can't be solved with technology - for which, see the sections on water vapour and cloud formations.

At any rate, the man you accuse of pseudoscience has the following publications to his credit. (Perhaps you could post your list of climate science publications so that I can properly respond):

Doctoral thesis
Characteristics of potential vorticity mixing by breaking Rossby waves in the vicinity of a jet. (Doctor of Science in Meteorology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1994)

Publications with review.
1. The effects of flow asymmetry on the direction of Rossby wave breaking. Nakamura, M. and R.A. Plumb, J. of Atmos. Sci., 51, 2031-2045 (1994).
2. Destabilization of the thermohaline circulation by atmospheric eddy transports. Nakamura, M., P.H. Stone, and J. Maroztke, J. of Climate, 7, 1870-1882 (1994).
3. Effects of the ice-albedo and runoff feedbacks on the thermohaline circulation. Nakamura, M., J. of Climate, 9, 1783-1794 (1996).
4. The role of high- and low-frequency dynamics in the blocking formation. Nakamura, H., M. Nakamura, and J.L. Anderson, Mon. Wea. Rev., 125, 2074-2093 (1997).
5. On modified rotational and divergent eddy fluxes and their application to blocking diagnoses. Nakamura, M., Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 124, 341-352 (1998).
6. On the eddy isopycnal thickness diffusivity of the Gent-McWilliams subgrid mixing parameterization. Nakamura, M. and Y. Chao, J. of Climate, 13, 502-510 (2000).
7. Characteristics of three-dimensional quasi-geostrophic transient eddy propagation in the vicinity of a simulated Gulf Stream. Nakamura, M. and Y. Chao, J. of Geophys. Res., 105, 11,385-11,406 (2000).
8. Diagnoses of an eddy-resolving Atlantic Ocean model simulation in the vicinity of the Gulf Stream. Part I: Potential vorticity. Nakamura, M. and Y. Chao, J. of Phys. Oceanogr., 31, 353-378 (2001).
9. Diagnoses of an eddy-resolving Atlantic Ocean model simulation in the vicinity of the Gulf Stream. Part II: Eddy potential enstrophy and eddy potential vorticity fluxes. Nakamura, M. and Y. Chao, J. of Phys. Oceanogr., 32, 1599-1620 (2002).
10. A simulation study of the 2003 heat wave in Europe. Nakamura, M., T. Enomoto, and S. Yamane, J. of the Earth Simulator, 2, 55-69 (2005).
11. Potential vorticity and eddy potential enstrophy in the North Atlantic Ocean simulated by a global eddy-resolving model. Nakamura, M. and T.
12. Transient wave activity and its fluxes in the North Atlantic Ocean simulKagimoto, Dynamics of Atmospheres and Oceans, 41, 28-59 (2006). ated by a global eddy-resolving model. Nakamura, M. and T. Kagimoto, Dynamics of Atmospheres and Oceans, 41, 60-84 (2006).
13. Dominant anomaly patterns in the near-surface baroclinicity and accompanying anomalies in the atmosphere and oceans. Part I: North Atlantic basin. Nakamura , M. and S. Yamane, J. of Climate, 22, 880-904 (2009).
14. Dominant anomaly patterns in the ne¥ar-surface baroclinicity and accompanying anomalies in the atmosphere and oceans. Part II: North Pacific basin. Nakamura , M. and S. Yamane, J. of Climate, 23, 6445-6467 (2010).
15. Quasigeostrophic transient wave activity flux: Updated climatology and its role in polar vortex anomalies. Nakamura , M., M. Kadota, and S. Yamane, J. of Atmos. Sci., 67, 3164-3189 (2010).
16. Impacts of SST anomalies in the Agulhas Current System on the climate variations in the southern Africa and its vicinity. Nakamura, M., J. of Climate, 25, 1213-1229 (2012).
17. Greenland Sea surface temperature change and accompanying changes in the northern hemispheric climate. Nakamura, M., J. of Climate, 26, 8576–8596 (2013)
18. Impacts of the Oyashio temperature front on the regional climate. Nakamura, M. and T. Miyama, J. of Climate, 27, 7861-7873 (2014)

idledim
30-09-2019, 11:02 AM
The fact remains that current climate models, when tested by hindcasting, "predict" past climate conditions closely enough to confirm their reliability.

On the reliability of this exercise, Mototaka says:

We also do not know for certain how the earth's climate has changed in the past 100 years or longer, although we do know well how regional climate has changed in limited regions, such as Europe, North America, and some parts of Asia. A quasi-global observation system has been operating only for 50 years or so, since the advent of artificial satellite observation. Temperature data before then were collected over extremely small (with respect to the earth's entire surface area) areas and, thus, have severe spatial bias. We have an inadequate amount of data to calculate the global mean surface temperature trend for the pre-satellite period. This severe spatial bias in reality casts a major uncertainty over the meaningfulness of "the global mean surface temperature trend" before 1980. There have been attempts to downplay the severity of this bias (e.g., Karl et al. 1995, Journal of Climate). But, those attempts generally fail to acknowledge the significance of actual spatial and temporal variabilities in the surface temperature over the globe and have not addressed the problems in the accuracy of the global mean surface temperature trend in a satisfactory manner.


He also indicates that treating solar inputs as a constant in those exercises is highly problematic.

idledim
30-09-2019, 11:10 AM
Amazon reviewer seems to have nailed it...

The predictive capability of climate change models has been an issue from the first use of such models. That's why so much effort has been put into checking model results against actual events. The result: the models are better at prediction than randomly guessing. In some areas (e.g., temperature change, sea level rise) the models are extremely accurate. Scarily so. At best the book should be calling for continued verification and data collection in all the variables of climate change. Right now the models and the data being collected to verify them are the best resources we have for dealing with climate change and its consequences.

From the man who (wrongly) accused me of getting my climate science from Quadrant, comes the man who apparently gets his from an Amazon reviewer. And not just any Amazon reviewer - indeed, the only Amazon reviewer who didn't give the book 5 stars. Cute!

On the matter of verification, Mototaka says:

So, in their view, those climate simulation models that have ostensible 3D flows in the atmosphere and oceans may be more than good enough for making climate predictions. They are not good enough. Incidentally, I never liked the term, "model validation", often used by most climate researchers to describe the action of assessing the extent to which the model output resembles the reality. They should use a more honest term such as "model assessment" rather than the disingenuous term, "model validation", and evaluate the model performance in an objective and scientific manner rather than trying to construct narratives that justify the use of these models for climate predictions.

Capablanca-Fan
30-09-2019, 11:28 AM
THE WEAPONISATION OF WESTERN CHILDREN (https://www.melaniephillips.com/weaponisation-western-children)
Melanie Phillips, 24 SEP 2019

To watch the teenage climate-change zealot Greta Thunberg at the UN was a distressing experience.

Not, though, for the reasons she intended. What was so distressing was to see this very vulnerable child’s anguish and rage at the world’s failure to put modernity itself into reverse, in order to combat a supposedly unstoppable apocalypse for which no plausible evidence whatever exists but over which nightmarish vision she and countless others are being terrified out of their wits by worthless or outright fraudulent studies which they have been led to believe constitute “settled” and unchallengeable science, heaven help us, and through which bogus emergency they are being used and manipulated to create global hysteria.

In other words, it’s a kind of madness, a repudiation of reason, that has now gripped great swathes of the world. But it’s even more sinister than that. For what appears to be emerging is a new strategy by those who want to destroy capitalism and the west.

What came out of Greta Thunberg’s mouth was utter rubbish. Her zero-carbon agenda would take us back to a pre-industrial age, if not earlier. It would certainly destroy modern life. This is what she was begging us, through her tears and her rage, to bring about. It was grotesque to watch such a child, who reportedly suffers from Asperger’s Syndrome, being manipulated into spouting such demonstrably ludicrous propositions dressed up as demands. “How dare you!” she cried; what that called to mind was nothing other than a childish tantrum.

What is now becoming clear, however, is that “climate change” is ancillary to the real issue – and that is nothing less than the destruction of capitalism and western society and culture. It’s an agenda which also requires the destruction of the western nation, which is why mass unchecked immigration is another enormous issue; and of course the destruction also of President Donald Trump, who embodies the fight by the west to retain its cultural distinctiveness characterised by capitalism, the nation state and modernity. And now children are being used to bring about this revolutionary agenda. What we are witnessing is the weaponisation of children.

Ian Murray
30-09-2019, 12:03 PM
THE WEAPONISATION OF WESTERN CHILDREN (https://www.melaniephillips.com/weaponisation-western-children)
Melanie Phillips, 24 SEP 2019

To watch the teenage climate-change zealot Greta Thunberg at the UN was a distressing experience.

Not, though, for the reasons she intended. What was so distressing was to see this very vulnerable child’s anguish and rage at the world’s failure to put modernity itself into reverse, in order to combat a supposedly unstoppable apocalypse for which no plausible evidence whatever exists but over which nightmarish vision she and countless others are being terrified out of their wits by worthless or outright fraudulent studies which they have been led to believe constitute “settled” and unchallengeable science, heaven help us, and through which bogus emergency they are being used and manipulated to create global hysteria.


Crazy woman. The science is irrefutable, and climate change is happening right now. Atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations are rising, global temperatures are rising, sea levels are rising, ice caps are shrinking, species are dying.

Blunderbuss
30-09-2019, 12:36 PM
Mototaka says

The deniers love it when they find an outlier and cling on for dear life. The problem however is it doesn’t address the issue of scientific consensus as James Delingpole found to his cost when asked by president of the Royal Society Sir Paul Nurse (Horizon January 2011): -


‘would he be willing to trust a scientific consensus if he required treatment for cancer?’


Poor James. I'm struck by one thought as I watch that video, and it's this. He could have recovered. When Nurse asked Delingpole the very straightforward question of whether he would be willing to trust a scientific consensus if he required treatment for cancer, he could have said "Gee, that's an interesting question. Let me think about that and why it's different." If he had an ounce of humility he could have saved himself. Instead, he became defensive and lost his focus. Eventually he would make such regrettable statements as this one: "It is not my job to sit down and read peer-reviewed papers because I simply haven’t got the time, I haven’t got the scientific expertise… I am an interpreter of interpretation." Oh dear. Would he trust a scientific consensus if his life depended on it? He evidently wasn't prepared for that question, which does seem a bit strange. I'll bet he's thought of at least a dozen answers to it now. In case he needs one more, here it is. In a parallel universe where James Delingpole is not the "penis" that Ben Goldacre describes him to be, he might have said the following:


Gee, that's an interesting question. Let me think about why it's different. (Thinks) Well, it seems to me that when evaluating a scientifically agreed treatment for a disease such as cancer, we have not only all the theory to peruse and the randomized and blinded trials, but also thousands if not millions of case studies where people have undergone the intervention. We have enough data to estimate a person's chances of recovery and know that on average they will do better. When discussing climate change, we really only have the one case study. Just the one earth. And it's a patient that has not undergone any intervention. The scientific consensus is therfore entirely theoretical and intangible. This makes it more difficult for the lay person such as myself to trust it.


It seems to me that this would be a fair, if somewhat misguided, answer to the question. And that brings me to the final point, upon which Sir Paul ended the program saying "Scientists have got to get out there… if we do not do that it will be filled by others who don’t understand the science, and who may be driven by politics and ideology."

http://flay.jellybee.co.uk/2011/01/james-delingpole-and-science-of.html (http://flay.jellybee.co.uk/2011/01/james-delingpole-and-science-of.html)

antichrist
30-09-2019, 01:10 PM
It certainly was the same for her. She was 8yo when she became aware of the changing climate and began her career as an activist. Inter alia, she convinced her parents to become vegan and give up flying (ending her mother's career as an international opera singer).

Her mother is the Real Thing. I despair to myself when local surfers tell me how they travel 50 miles up or down the coast just to catch a wave. They are contributing towards destroying that wave.

Patrick Byrom
30-09-2019, 01:55 PM
The issue is not whether I agree with the laws of physics, since I simply posted a link to the work of climate scientist Mototaka Nakamura. The issue is whether he agrees with the laws of physics. His list of publications indicates that he probably does! In order to respond to Mototaka's arguments you probably need to be familiar with them. How do you know what data sets he is using, or even if his arguments depend on data sets, if you haven't made yourself familiar with them? have tried to help by posting excerpts from his essay. They've been met with silence. If you had read Mototaka, you would know that his emphasis is not on a global conspiracy. It is on the impossibility of creating adequate simulations because of the technology that we currently possess.You didn't just "simply post[ed] a link". You also said:

... They are the mechanism the IPCC relies on to speak with greater or lesser confidence about the veracity of Greta's apocalyptic, dystopian vision. I think it's pretty obvious that direct responses to Mototaka's objections is preferable to demonisation . One might even say, with Greta, 'how dare you?" Anyway, here is the final paragraph from the Appendix: ... So I pointed out that the concern expressed by Thunberg and others is based on the laws of physics, not on climate models. If you agree with the laws of physics, then you will be concerned about global heating.

According to the Quadrant article:

... And if Nakamura believes that the temperature data is the result of a global conspiracy by scientists - a claim that has already been demolished here - then it's hard to take anything else he says seriously:

Somehow that official warning was deep-sixed by the alarmists. Now Nakamura has found it again, further accusing the orthodox scientists of “data falsification” by adjusting previous temperature data to increase apparent warming “The global surface mean temperature-change data no longer have any scientific value and are nothing except a propaganda tool to the public,” he writes.

The main argument against Nakamura's claims is (as has been pointed out repeatedly!) that current models accurately predict the climate, including the surface temperature. But Nakamura claims that the surface temperature data has been corrupted. Until we agree on what surface temperature data to use, I can't refute his claims.

So let's start at the beginning. Why don't you post his supporting evidence for the above claim, and then we can discuss it.

Finally, I'm not going to clog up this thread with detailed technical discussions. Especially when I'm not sure that you will be able to understand them. I know Nakamura is qualified in physics, and so am I (look me up!). What are your credentials in physics?

Patrick Byrom
30-09-2019, 02:15 PM
On the reliability of this exercise, Mototaka says:
We also do not know for certain how the earth's climate has changed in the past 100 years or longer, although we do know well how regional climate has changed in limited regions, such as Europe, North America, and some parts of Asia. A quasi-global observation system has been operating only for 50 years or so, since the advent of artificial satellite observation. Temperature data before then were collected over extremely small (with respect to the earth's entire surface area) areas and, thus, have severe spatial bias. We have an inadequate amount of data to calculate the global mean surface temperature trend for the pre-satellite period. This severe spatial bias in reality casts a major uncertainty over the meaningfulness of "the global mean surface temperature trend" before 1980. There have been attempts to downplay the severity of this bias (e.g., Karl et al. 1995, Journal of Climate). But, those attempts generally fail to acknowledge the significance of actual spatial and temporal variabilities in the surface temperature over the globe and have not addressed the problems in the accuracy of the global mean surface temperature trend in a satisfactory manner.

He also indicates that treating solar inputs as a constant in those exercises is highly problematic.The majority of scientists think that the historical estimates of global surface temperature are reliable. Nakamura apparently doesn't. But his claims are extremely vague. How unreliable exactly is the historical record, according to Nakamura? Maybe you can post his estimates of that unreliability? It's entirely possible that the unreliability (which is unavoidable in any set of data) doesn't prevent the hindcasting that Ian is referring to.

The fact that the only paper he quotes on historical temperature reconstruction is from 1995(!), back in the 'dark ages' of computing, doesn't inspire confidence. Michael Mann alone has published multiple papers in this area since that date.

idledim
30-09-2019, 03:03 PM
The majority of scientists think that the historical estimates of global surface temperature are reliable. Nakamura apparently doesn't. But his claims are extremely vague. How unreliable exactly is the historical record, according to Nakamura? Maybe you can post his estimates of that unreliability? It's entirely possible that the unreliability (which is unavoidable in any set of data) doesn't prevent the hindcasting that Ian is referring to.

The fact that the only paper he quotes on historical temperature reconstruction is from 1995(!), back in the 'dark ages' of computing, doesn't inspire confidence. Michael Mann alone has published multiple papers in this area since that date.

It is indeed possible that unreliability doesn't prevent accurate hindcasting. It's 'possible'.'Did you miss his observation that he isn't denying the possibility of catastrophic global warming, but simply pointing out that it's impossible for us to know what the climate will be in the future because the simulations can't represent the levels of complexity in the climate system. His objections don't depend on an alternative set of global surface temperatures - or any kind of conspiracy - they depend on his understanding of the importance of solar inputs, oceans, clouds and water vapour. If you think he doesn't understand the physics of those things - and their critical importance to the reliability of climate simulations - then just let me know why not ...after all, I'm not a physicist (though I do realise that, when it suits you, being a physicist with 30 years of distinguished experience (Peter Ridd), doesn't seem to matter much to you - except as a point of censure).

As to your concerns about clogging up the thread, you've previously defended young Greta on the grounds that: You don't need scientific qualifications to understand the science. The basic issues can be understood by anyone with a high school education.


I look forward to your critical review of Mototaka Nakamura's actual problems with climate simulations - and in a way that can be understood by anyone with a high school education.

Incidentally, I did take up your invitation to look me up. This what I found: Patrick Byrom (https://www.kktv.com/content/news/Pueblo-West-bank-robbery-suspects-caught-in-Texas-after-chase-500869971.html)

Patrick Byrom
30-09-2019, 03:31 PM
It is indeed possible that unreliability doesn't prevent accurate hindcasting. It's 'possible'.'Did you miss his observation that he isn't denying the possibility of catastrophic global warming, but simply pointing out that it's impossible for us to know what the climate will be in the future because the simulations can't represent the levels of complexity in the climate system. His objections don't depend on an alternative set of global surface temperatures - or any kind of conspiracy - they depend on his understanding of the importance of solar inputs, oceans, clouds and water vapour. If you think he doesn't understand the physics of those things - and their critical importance to the reliability of climate simulations - then just let me know why not ...after all, I'm not a physicist (though I do realise that, when it suits you, being a physicist with 30 years of distinguished experience (Peter Ridd), doesn't seem to matter much to you - except as a point of censure).I've never doubted Ridd's credentials as a physicist. My problem is that he is making claims about marine biology, in which he is not an expert. And I never said that Nakamura didn't understand climate modelling. Instead I specifically asked you for the level of uncertainty he is claiming to exist in the historical temperature data.


As to your concerns about clogging up the thread, you've previously defended young Greta on the grounds that: You don't need scientific qualifications to understand the science. The basic issues can be understood by anyone with a high school education. The basic issues can be. That doesn't mean that the technical issues that Nakamura is raising can be understood by someone with high school physics. Students study Newton's theory of gravity in high school. That doesn't mean that they can understand general relativity.


I look forward to your critical review of Mototaka Nakamura's actual problems with climate simulations - and in a way that can be understood by anyone with a high school education.And I look forward to you posting Nakamura's evidence that the global temperature data has been corrupted.


Incidentally, I did take up your invitation to look me up. This what I found: Patrick Byrom (https://www.kktv.com/content/news/Pueblo-West-bank-robbery-suspects-caught-in-Texas-after-chase-500869971.html)Maybe you should have included "physics" in your search terms: https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/7988220_P_G_Byrom :)

ER
30-09-2019, 04:57 PM
https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/queensland/four-charged-over-tripod-protest-on-brisbane-s-victoria-bridge-20190930-p52w8q.html

I very much doubt that the world is threatened by climate change.
However, our lives definitely are blatantly disrupted by morons!

MichaelBaron
30-09-2019, 05:03 PM
https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/queensland/four-charged-over-tripod-protest-on-brisbane-s-victoria-bridge-20190930-p52w8q.html

I very much doubt that the world is threatened by climate change.
However, our lives definitely are blatantly disrupted by morons!

Its not just the climate change it is the story of the whole ''leftist'' movement disrupting people's lives and well-being

Patrick Byrom
30-09-2019, 05:11 PM
Its not just the climate change it is the story of the whole ''leftist'' movement disrupting people's lives and well-beingI think the disruption caused by the drought (made worse by global heating) is a little worse (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/sep/30/the-coalition-says-it-is-spending-7bn-on-drought-but-cant-back-up-the-claim):

As Australia grapples with extended drought across the country – in many places, the worst on record – the Coalition has been talking up its $7bn drought package in support of “struggling farming families”. Labor’s Joel Fitzgibbon has called it the “most audacious lie” he has ever heard in politics, saying very little of the $7bn is actually hitting the ground in drought affected communities. The government has been unable to provide details of the spending to back up the claim.

MichaelBaron
30-09-2019, 05:37 PM
I think the disruption caused by the drought (made worse by global heating) is a little worse (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/sep/30/the-coalition-says-it-is-spending-7bn-on-drought-but-cant-back-up-the-claim):

As Australia grapples with extended drought across the country – in many places, the worst on record – the Coalition has been talking up its $7bn drought package in support of “struggling farming families”. Labor’s Joel Fitzgibbon has called it the “most audacious lie” he has ever heard in politics, saying very little of the $7bn is actually hitting the ground in drought affected communities. The government has been unable to provide details of the spending to back up the claim.

So is this drought related to ''global climate change'' or just another instance of drought? Droughts have always happened :).
Re struggling farming families...I've heard this every since coming to Austraila...they always ''struggle'' and expect government support.

Blunderbuss
30-09-2019, 06:08 PM
I think Ian gave the best advice DO NOT FEED THE CLIMATE TROLLS (https://www.sciencealert.com/do-not-feed-the-climate-trolls)

Patrick Byrom
30-09-2019, 06:10 PM
So is this drought related to ''global climate change'' or just another instance of drought? Droughts have always happened :).Both - it's another instance of drought, which are a regular occurrence in Australia, but it's also the worst on record in many places, and that's probably the result of global heating.

Patrick Byrom
30-09-2019, 06:32 PM
I think Ian gave the best advice DO NOT FEED THE CLIMATE TROLLS (https://www.sciencealert.com/do-not-feed-the-climate-trolls)I thought that the points ER and Michael made in their most recent posts were quite reasonable ones. I don't have a problem with idleim's recent posts, either - although it would be better if he paraphrased, rather than quoting slabs of text.

Capablanca-Fan
30-09-2019, 11:11 PM
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamoring to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” H.L. Mencken (1880–1956)

antichrist
01-10-2019, 01:35 AM
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamoring to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” H.L. Mencken (1880–1956)

Maybe but what is the history of this guy. It was sort of predicted, maybe by Freud, in about 1885 that Germany was going "Nazi" (izaN), maybe not a term then. Freud and others warned against the trend. Mencken was one of those who about fifty years later were accused in America of being Nazi (izaN) sympathisers. In this case the alarmists at least approximately 50 years earlier were correct - and his quote even retrospectively was incorrect. Do I also become famous now for defaming a famous person?

As Mencken's quote is used in this thread I think it is important that criticism of it is also included in this thread because readers may not follow my dribble to another thread.

Capablanca-Fan
01-10-2019, 04:49 AM
Experts Warn We Have Only 12 Years Left Until They Change The Timeline On Global Warming Again (https://babylonbee.com/news/experts-warn-we-have-only-12-years-left-until-they-change-the-dates-on-global-warming-again)
Babylon Bee [satire], 1 August 2019

"If we don't take action, then in 12 years we will have to explain why the world hasn't ended and come up with a new number," one UN scientist warned. "This is a very serious threat, and we urge everyone to hand control of the economy to the government immediately before we have no more time left to change the timeline again."

The scientific consensus is that roughly 10-12 years from now, the world will be flooded with new doomsday predictions. This can all be avoided if we overhaul the economy and become socialists, according to non-political, unbiased sciencey type guys.

"Should we not change our ways, our old predictions will melt, dangerously raising the chance of us having to move the goalposts again," said Al Gore. "Do you really want me to write another book, film another movie, and go on another tour in my private jet just because you dingbats couldn't be bothered to alter your lifestyles? I don't think so. Let's all get on board with this 12-year figure, or we'll have to push back the date again."

Kevin Bonham
01-10-2019, 11:38 AM
Mencken was one of those who about fifty years later were accused in America of being Nazi (izaN) sympathisers.

Being accused of being a Nazi sympathiser doesn't mean he was one. Mencken underestimated the Nazis, treating them with no more contempt than all the other politicians he disdained, but that doesn't mean he liked them.

As discussed on another thread the original version of the quote said "most of them imaginary". In a subsequent printing it was changed to "all of them imaginary".

antichrist
01-10-2019, 01:55 PM
Being accused of being a Nazi sympathiser doesn't mean he was one. Mencken underestimated the Nazis, treating them with no more contempt than all the other politicians he disdained, but that doesn't mean he liked them.

As discussed on another thread the original version of the quote said "most of them imaginary". In a subsequent printing it was changed to "all of them imaginary".


Hoped I have grasped this correctly because I am on the run.

But the warning against rising German nationalism made by Neitzche, in maybe the exact year my grandfather was born, was not imaginary at all but most unfortunately too true. If I have interpreted correctly Mencken, whom had the benefit of approximately thirty years more subsequent knowledge than Neitzche, still got it wrong and/or was biased and it got the better of him. Mencken's underestimation is his downfall and has no excuse.
I am looking for hero status here tackling a "GM".

(I may have some of Mencken's old books BTW).

Ian Murray
01-10-2019, 03:40 PM
So is this drought related to ''global climate change'' or just another instance of drought? Droughts have always happened :).
Re struggling farming families...I've heard this every since coming to Austraila...they always ''struggle'' and expect government support.

Drought-hit Australian towns prepare for 'unimaginable' water crisis (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-australia-drought/drought-hit-australian-towns-prepare-for-unimaginable-water-crisis-idUSKBN1WC2EP)
Reuters
28.9.19


...Australia has enjoyed growth for a generation yet livelihoods are now at risk from drought worsened by climate change, a predicament more familiar to developing countries.

Parts of northern and inland New South Wales, along with southern Queensland, have been in drought since 2016, severely depleting river and dam levels.

Australia’s Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) says the drought is being driven, in part, by warmer sea-surface temperatures impacting rainfall patterns. Air temperatures have also warmed over the past century, increasing the ferocity of droughts and fires. ....

BOM site:

Annual climate statement 2018 (http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/current/annual/aus/2018/)

The air above Antarctica is suddenly getting warmer – here's what it means for Australia (http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/updates/articles/a035.shtml)

MichaelBaron
01-10-2019, 04:56 PM
Drought-hit Australian towns prepare for 'unimaginable' water crisis (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-australia-drought/drought-hit-australian-towns-prepare-for-unimaginable-water-crisis-idUSKBN1WC2EP)
Reuters
28.9.19


...Australia has enjoyed growth for a generation yet livelihoods are now at risk from drought worsened by climate change, a predicament more familiar to developing countries.

Parts of northern and inland New South Wales, along with southern Queensland, have been in drought since 2016, severely depleting river and dam levels.

Australia’s Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) says the drought is being driven, in part, by warmer sea-surface temperatures impacting rainfall patterns. Air temperatures have also warmed over the past century, increasing the ferocity of droughts and fires. ....

BOM site:

Annual climate statement 2018 (http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/current/annual/aus/2018/)

The air above Antarctica is suddenly getting warmer – here's what it means for Australia (http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/updates/articles/a035.shtml)

And it did not hit Australia before?
Ever since I came to Australia - farmers have been ''complaining about life''. I strongly doubt that that the complains have not started earlier.

Blunderbuss
01-10-2019, 05:52 PM
The drought – not climate change?

Hurricane Dorian - most powerful tropical cyclone on record to strike the Bahamas 60 dead 600 missing – not climate change?

Cyclone Idai and Cyclone Kenneth kill more than 1,000 people in Mozambique – not climate change?

3900

The past present and future of climate change (https://www.economist.com/briefing/2019/09/21/the-past-present-and-future-of-climate-change)


Putting off to tomorrow

Dislocation on such a scale might be undertaken if a large asteroid on a fixed trajectory were set to devastate North America on January 1st 2031. It is far harder to imagine when the victims are less readily identifiable and the harms less cosmically certain—even if they eventually turn out to be comparable in scale. Realising this, the climate negotiators of the world have, over the past decade, increasingly come to depend on the idea of “negative emissions”. Instead of not putting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere at all, put it in and take it out later. By evoking ever larger negative emissions later in the century it is possible to accept a later peak and a slower reduction while still being able to say that you will end up within the 1.5°C or 2°C limit (see “four futures” chart).

Unfortunately, technologies capable of delivering negative emissions of billions of tonnes a year for reasonable prices over decades do not exist.

MichaelBaron
01-10-2019, 05:59 PM
The drought – not climate change?

Hurricane Dorian - most powerful tropical cyclone on record to strike the Bahamas 60 dead 600 missing – not climate change?

Cyclone Idai and Cyclone Kenneth kill more than 1,000 people in Mozambique – not climate change?

3900

The past present and future of climate change (https://www.economist.com/briefing/2019/09/21/the-past-present-and-future-of-climate-change)


Putting off to tomorrow

Dislocation on such a scale might be undertaken if a large asteroid on a fixed trajectory were set to devastate North America on January 1st 2031. It is far harder to imagine when the victims are less readily identifiable and the harms less cosmically certain—even if they eventually turn out to be comparable in scale. Realising this, the climate negotiators of the world have, over the past decade, increasingly come to depend on the idea of “negative emissions”. Instead of not putting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere at all, put it in and take it out later. By evoking ever larger negative emissions later in the century it is possible to accept a later peak and a slower reduction while still being able to say that you will end up within the 1.5°C or 2°C limit (see “four futures” chart).

Unfortunately, technologies capable of delivering negative emissions of billions of tonnes a year for reasonable prices over decades do not exist.

No Hurricanes before 1970's ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_deadliest_Atlantic_hurricanes

Patrick Byrom
01-10-2019, 06:46 PM
No Hurricanes before 1970's ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_deadliest_Atlantic_hurricanesYou do understand that nobody is arguing that droughts and hurricanes were created solely by global heating - the claim is that it makes them worse?

Kevin Bonham
01-10-2019, 06:53 PM
No Hurricanes before 1970's ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_deadliest_Atlantic_hurricanes

Deadliness of hurricanes is a useless comparative measure because of changes in forecasting, construction standards, evacuation ability and medical care (all of which count against a high death toll) but also population density (which counts for a higher death toll), and probably other things beside.

The hurricane produced a seemingly remarkable degree of inundation on Grand Bahama: https://www.npr.org/2019/09/03/757139724/satellite-imagery-shows-extent-of-devastating-flooding-on-grand-bahama-island . The area is hurricane-prone but it would be interesting to know if inundation on such a scale has been recorded there before.

idledim
01-10-2019, 07:18 PM
According to this report in Nature, there has been little change in global drought over the past 60 years (https://www.nature.com/articles/nature11575?WT.mc_id=EN1112MN15)

According to another Nature report there have been large variations in precipitation over the past millennium
(https://www.su.se/english/research/profile-areas/climate-seas-and-environment/large-variations-in-precipitation-over-the-past-millennium-1.277993)

Maybe the climate predictions are cloudy because it is important to recognize that the central issue of human-caused climate change is not a question of whether it is warming or not, but rather a question of how much. And to this relevant question, the answer has been, and remains, that the warming is taking place at a much slower rate than is being projected.

Is There No “Hiatus” in Global Warming After All?
(https://www.cato.org/blog/there-no-hiatus-global-warming-after-all)

Patrick Byrom
01-10-2019, 07:45 PM
According to this report in Nature, there has been little change in global drought over the past 60 years (https://www.nature.com/articles/nature11575?WT.mc_id=EN1112MN15)
According to another Nature report there have been large variations in precipitation over the past millennium (https://www.su.se/english/research/profile-areas/climate-seas-and-environment/large-variations-in-precipitation-over-the-past-millennium-1.277993)
Maybe the climate predictions are cloudy because it is important to recognize that the central issue of human-caused climate change is not a question of whether it is warming or not, but rather a question of how much. And to this relevant question, the answer has been, and remains, that the warming is taking place at a much slower rate than is being projected.Is There No “Hiatus” in Global Warming After All?
(https://www.cato.org/blog/there-no-hiatus-global-warming-after-all)Your first Nature article is from 2012 - I'm not sure how relevant that is to Australia's current situation, especially considering the dramatic warming of the past few years. And I don't understand the relevance of the second paper at all to the Australian drought.

On the other hand, the Australian BOM considers that global heating is part of the problem (http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/updates/articles/a010-southern-rainfall-decline.shtml):

While natural rainfall variability in Australia is large, and influenced strongly by the El Niño-Southern Oscillation, based on current research it seems likely that drying across southern Australia cannot be explained by natural variability alone. A shift in atmospheric circulation characterised by a contraction of mid-latitude storm tracks towards higher southern latitudes, and movement of the subtropical and polar jetstreams, has very likely contributed to the cool season rainfall declines in southern Australia. A contraction of these weather systems toward the pole is at least partly explainable by anthropogenic warming and potentially also contributed to by anthropogenic reductions in stratospheric ozone. Global warming also reduces the temperature gradient between the equator and pole, reducing the energy available to mid-latitude weather systems (see the Climate Change in Australia website and Technical Report (PDF) for more information).
That article is from 2015, but its concerns seem to have been valid.

idledim
01-10-2019, 08:59 PM
Your first Nature article is from 2012 - I'm not sure how relevant that is to Australia's current situation, especially considering the dramatic warming of the past few years. And I don't understand the relevance of the second paper at all to the Australian drought

I thought the observations about precipitation were interesting and relevant to any discussion of drought, since drought is usually the result of either a decline in precipitation or an increase in evaporation, or both. I thought the observations about 12CE (relatively warm) and 15CE (relatively cold) were interesting because it turns out that they were the 2 most drought affected centuries. The relatively recent Californian drought was widely attributed to climate change. In that case it was apparently the result of a significant decline in precipitation (rather than a significant increase in evaporation). Nor was it part of any long-term change in precipitation (according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). I'm not aware of whether the Australian drought is the result of a long-term change in the rate of precipitation and/or evaporation - and I'm not saying that the drought and climate change are definitely unrelated. All I'm saying is that the historical record shows that some of the most severe droughts have happened when things were cooler than usual (15CE). And why not? The coldest city in the world (Oymyakon) only gets 8 inches a year and one of the driest places in the world is Antarctica's McMurdo Dry Valleys. Warmer doesn't necessarily equal drier.

At any rate, my strong hunch is that Australian farmers are praying for rain right now - not global cooling!

Ian Murray
01-10-2019, 09:10 PM
And it did not hit Australia before?
Ever since I came to Australia - farmers have been ''complaining about life''. I strongly doubt that that the complains have not started earlier.

Some droughts are worse than others. As the Reuters article concludes:

“Worst drought I’ve ever seen,” he said at the bus depot in Guyra. “We had a bad one in the early 80s but even that was nothing like this.”

Patrick Byrom
01-10-2019, 09:23 PM
... I'm not aware of whether the Australian drought is the result of a long-term change in the rate of precipitation and/or evaporation - and I'm not saying that the drought and climate change are definitely unrelated.The BOM is saying that the drought is linked to global heating causing long term changes, however (as I quoted in my last post).


All I'm saying is that the historical record shows that some of the most severe droughts have happened when things were cooler than usual (15CE). And why not? The coldest city in the world (Oymyakon) only gets 8 inches a year and one of the driest places in the world is Antarctica's McMurdo Dry Valleys. Warmer doesn't necessarily equal drier.True. But global heating doesn't just increase temperatures. It also injects more energy into the system, which increases the 'forcing' in climate variability. So it results in more extremes - worse droughts followed by worse floods and cyclones. The AAS has a good summary (https://www.science.org.au/learning/general-audience/science-climate-change/5-how-are-extreme-events-changing).


At any rate, my strong hunch is that Australian farmers are praying for rain right now - not global cooling!I bet they're praying for both. With summer approaching, extreme hot temperatures are the last thing they need if they do get rainfall.

Ian Murray
02-10-2019, 09:10 AM
How Britain Ended Its Coal Addiction (https://insideclimatenews.org/news/01102019/uk-coal-addiction-phase-out-natural-gas-renewable-energy-electricity)
Financial Times
1.10.19

...in 1971, conventional coal and oil power plants accounted for 88 percent of electricity supplied to the UK market. Last year, coal's share had shrunk to just 5 percent. And between April and June this year, it fell to an all-time low of just 0.6 percent....

Its transformation from coal powerhouse—as recently as 1960, coal mining employed more than 600,000 people—to almost coal power-free is hugely significant at a time when countries are grappling with how to meet the 2015 Paris climate deal to limit global warming to well below 2 degrees Celsius. To achieve this, global emissions of carbon dioxide should already be declining by 3 percent a year—but instead, they are still rising, reaching a record high in 2018.

The EU is pushing for a bloc-wide target to cut net CO2 emissions to zero by 2050—a target the UK committed to law this summer. Yet some member states are still heavily reliant on the fuel. Poland, for example, still draws 80 percent of its electricity from coal-fired plants. And in Germany, the biggest coal consumer and biggest power producer in the EU, coal accounted for just over a third of power generation last year.

"The British experience shows that any country can actually do it [end coal power], it's a question of putting the policies in place to do it," says Richard Black, director of the Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit, a UK environmental think-tank. "Had Germany decided to tackle coal first rather than nuclear [which it has committed to phasing out by 2022], I think Germany could be in a similar position to the UK."...

MichaelBaron
02-10-2019, 11:27 AM
Deadliness of hurricanes is a useless comparative measure because of changes in forecasting, construction standards, evacuation ability and medical care (all of which count against a high death toll) but also population density (which counts for a higher death toll), and probably other things beside.

The hurricane produced a seemingly remarkable degree of inundation on Grand Bahama: https://www.npr.org/2019/09/03/757139724/satellite-imagery-shows-extent-of-devastating-flooding-on-grand-bahama-island . The area is hurricane-prone but it would be interesting to know if inundation on such a scale has been recorded there before.

Exactly. Just like the rest of the ''Really Big Data'' that the Global Warming Fighters keep referring to. So may be we should not fear extinction anytime short.

MichaelBaron
02-10-2019, 11:28 AM
Your first Nature article is from 2012 - I'm not sure how relevant that is to Australia's current situation, especially considering the dramatic warming of the past few years. And I don't understand the relevance of the second paper at all to the Australian drought.



You are looking into processes that have been taking place over 1000s of years ...yet so much happened in 7 years :)

Patrick Byrom
02-10-2019, 12:14 PM
You are looking into processes that have been taking place over 1000s of years ...yet so much happened in 7 years :)Man-made global warming didn't take place over thousands of years, and has gotten significantly worse recently.

Patrick Byrom
02-10-2019, 12:22 PM
Exactly. Just like the rest of the ''Really Big Data'' that the Global Warming Fighters keep referring to. So may be we should not fear extinction anytime short.All that heat energy in the atmosphere has to go somewhere - conservation of energy is one of the most important laws of physics.

Desmond
02-10-2019, 05:32 PM
Experts Warn We Have Only 12 Years Left Until They Change The Timeline On Global Warming Again (https://babylonbee.com/news/experts-warn-we-have-only-12-years-left-until-they-change-the-dates-on-global-warming-again)
Babylon Bee [satire], 1 August 2019

"If we don't take action, then in 12 years we will have to explain why the world hasn't ended and come up with a new number," one UN scientist warned. "This is a very serious threat, and we urge everyone to hand control of the economy to the government immediately before we have no more time left to change the timeline again."

The scientific consensus is that roughly 10-12 years from now, the world will be flooded with new doomsday predictions. This can all be avoided if we overhaul the economy and become socialists, according to non-political, unbiased sciencey type guys.

"Should we not change our ways, our old predictions will melt, dangerously raising the chance of us having to move the goalposts again," said Al Gore. "Do you really want me to write another book, film another movie, and go on another tour in my private jet just because you dingbats couldn't be bothered to alter your lifestyles? I don't think so. Let's all get on board with this 12-year figure, or we'll have to push back the date again."

You mean, such as Lindzen, Michaels, Easterbrook, and Akasofu?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=71&v=wJoMp-k_H3w

antichrist
02-10-2019, 10:29 PM
Some droughts are worse than others. As the Reuters article concludes:

“Worst drought I’ve ever seen,” he said at the bus depot in Guyra. “We had a bad one in the early 80s but even that was nothing like this.”

And there was one in the early sixties and I was told in the eighties “We had a bad one in the early 60s but even that was nothing like this.”

antichrist
02-10-2019, 10:39 PM
In the Philippines I know people who have been doing fish ponds for fifty years and they are finding very unusual "eruptions" of conditions leading to fish kills etc.. Circumstances are uncharacteristically changing frequently causing havoc. Dams are forced to realise less or more quantities water that is of different quality and temperature.

Another feature of changing climate in the Philippines is the tricycle riders dying in the saddle due to heat stroke. I have played chess against such guys since the seventies and I have not heard of before.

Ian Murray
03-10-2019, 08:27 AM
Toxins in the ground: Inside America's most polluted coal ash site and industry's struggle with federal rules (https://www.utilitydive.com/news/toxins-in-the-ground-inside-americas-most-polluted-coal-ash-site-and-indu/551339/)
UtilityDive
6.5.19

...Data from electric companies across the country show that almost every coal plant in the country is contaminating the ground they sit on with chemicals, many of them toxic.

For utilities that have dealt with adverse impacts of the contamination publicly, pressure to clean up is mounting. But the federal regulations intended to direct cleanup efforts leave many dumpsites untouched, and the Environmental Protection Agency is in the process of eroding oversight further in a rulemaking proceeding that began in March of last year.

The cost of coal

Over 100 million tons of coal ash are produced each year, according to the American Coal Ash Association (ACAA). Utilities that burn coal-fired power mix the dry ash with water to create the thick sludge stored in coal ash "ponds" near plants.

In 2008, over 1 billion gallons of coal ash spilled from a Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) coal waste pond. The full impact of the disaster did not register until almost 10 years later, when the death of over 30 workers and the terminal illnesses of 300 more built the case that cleaning up the toxic metals without proper protective gear can be fatal.

The EPA responded to that spill and the 2014 Duke Energy spill in North Carolina by establishing federal coal combustion residual (CCR) rules in 2015 to monitor coal ash disposal, requiring all utilities to report ground monitoring data from their sites.

Results from those filings, compiled by the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP), Earthjustice and the Sierra Club, found that over 90% of coal plants in the U.S. reported unsafe levels of one or more of a host of toxic chemicals near their coal plants....

Blunderbuss
03-10-2019, 01:55 PM
I got some more hieroglyphics for ER (and others) to study…

3904

You can crack the code here: https://twitter.com/Sustainable2050/status/1179139196054884352 (https://twitter.com/Sustainable2050/status/1179139196054884352)

And here: -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z43FQCSg4Ow&feature=youtu.be

ER
03-10-2019, 03:59 PM
3905

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/dad-pulls-son-out-of-school-over-climate-change-brainwashing/ar-AAIcWbk?ocid=spartanntp

Sir, sir!!! we have some hippy clad climate change brainwashed "adults" here too!! :D :P

Kevin Bonham
03-10-2019, 04:20 PM
Requiring children to perform Big Yellow Taxi really would be child abuse.

If it really happened like that of course. Judgement is reserved given the range of media covering the story.

Blunderbuss
03-10-2019, 04:37 PM
Requiring children to perform Big Yellow Taxi really would be child abuse.

Harsh!

They put all the trees
In a tree museum
And charged the people
A dollar and a half just to see them.

They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot

Bloody hippies

Desmond
03-10-2019, 04:51 PM
3905

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/dad-pulls-son-out-of-school-over-climate-change-brainwashing/ar-AAIcWbk?ocid=spartanntp

Sir, sir!!! we have some hippy clad climate change brainwashed "adults" here too!! :D :P

Sounds like he waited too long to pull out.

Blunderbuss
03-10-2019, 11:44 PM
More hippies https://www.theguardian.com/music/2019/jun/11/radiohead-release-hours-of-hacked-songs-to-benefit-extinction-rebellion (https://www.theguardian.com/music/2019/jun/11/radiohead-release-hours-of-hacked-songs-to-benefit-extinction-rebellion)

antichrist
04-10-2019, 12:21 AM
Harsh!

They put all the trees
In a tree museum
And charged the people
A dollar and a half just to see them.

They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot

Bloody hippies

Almost fifty years ago my neighbours would complain that my "excessive" trees, I create a forest on every property I get involved in, were attracting too many noisy birds. The flip side was when their wives made them copy my habit and then the area would become like an oasis for wildlife. The wives wanted the look. In Byron my rich neighbours, wives included, whinge if a branch interrupts one degree of their ocean view and they poison my trees I am told by the experts.

The Mitchell rainforest snail here means nothing to a Liberal state government, they are bulldozing a car bypass into a forest. Whereas under Carr a rare local orchid saved a big hill from subdivision, the govt. bought the land and donated as a national park. And funny enough it was an invalid pensioner on welfare that first found the orchid - just the type I on heard on TV tonight that the govt don't want involved in environmental issues. First time I had (accidentally) watched Oz news in ages.

ER
04-10-2019, 02:05 AM
Almost fifty years ago my neighbours would complain that my "excessive" trees, I create a forest on every property I get involved in, were attracting too many noisy birds. The flip side was when their wives made them copy my habit and then the area would become like an oasis for wildlife. The wives wanted the look. In Byron my rich neighbours, wives included, whinge if a branch interrupts one degree of their ocean view and they poison my trees I am told by the experts.

The Mitchell rainforest snail here means nothing to a Liberal state government, they are bulldozing a car bypass into a forest. Whereas under Carr a rare local orchid saved a big hill from subdivision, the govt. bought the land and donated as a national park. And funny enough it was an invalid pensioner on welfare that first found the orchid - just the type I on heard on TV tonight that the govt don't want involved in environmental issues. First time I had (accidentally) watched Oz news in ages.

An excellent piece of writing with real life examples given in a colourful down to earth style.
I told you before, take control of the climate/greenie movement in this joint.
Your sidekicks give environmental issues in Chesschat climate thread a bad name
with their ranting, sulky, and irrelevant/incomprehensible yada/blunder/yada!

Patrick Byrom
04-10-2019, 01:38 PM
The point I was making that I was well below the ago of Greta and did not need any input from adults so why couldn't it also be the same for Greta. I was indoctrinated into the DLP (and religion) if anything - it was even from over the pulpit and I was an altar boy so I got multiple doses. The same people who think Greta was indoctrinated should regret that I was also indoctrinated at a tender age.I wasn't having a go at you. But ER's repeated objections to discussing science on a specifically science-related thread make no sense. He should start his own, non-scientific, thread on the environment.

MichaelBaron
04-10-2019, 05:54 PM
https://7news.com.au/news/climate-change/unemployed-climate-activists-should-have-their-welfare-scrapped-michaelia-cash-c-487907

It certainly belongs here as well as in the ''Social security'' thread...this is what should be happening hopefully....NO PROFESSIONAL protesters, thx.
People disrupt those...who feed them.

Patrick Byrom
04-10-2019, 06:22 PM
Reserve Bank warning about the dangers of climate change (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/oct/04/reserve-bank-warns-climate-change-posing-increasing-risk-to-financial-stability):

The RBA concludes that climate change poses a clear systemic risk, but it is not yet an imminent threat to financial stability. But it warns this could change. “Climate change could emerge as a risk to financial stability if it is not properly managed, or if the size of climate-related losses increased materially. “Rising climate-related losses could also erode confidence in an institution or the financial system, leading to a withdrawal of funding. This would be more likely if the physical impacts of climate change are more severe or occur sooner than currently projected, or if the transition to a low-carbon economy occurs in a disruptive and costly manner.”

antichrist
04-10-2019, 06:25 PM
Professional protesters if they exist are doing the high moral act they their less responsible fellow human can't handle. I sometimes feel I am letting the team down by being too preoccupied expanding my income. Every thing just takes longer than expected. But I highly satisfied that a new generation of environmental protesters are taking up the fight. My generation's struggle was not in vain though not always successful. I still can't fathom how religious followers can let their creator's creatures be vanished off the planet by climate change etc.

Ian Murray
04-10-2019, 07:09 PM
https://7news.com.au/news/climate-change/unemployed-climate-activists-should-have-their-welfare-scrapped-michaelia-cash-c-487907

It certainly belongs here as well as in the ''Social security'' thread...this is what should be happening hopefully....NO PROFESSIONAL protesters, thx.
People disrupt those...who feed them.

To receive Newstart payments, recipients must follow an approved Job Plan (https://www.humanservices.gov.au/individuals/services/centrelink/special-benefit/managing-your-payment/mutual-obligation-requirements) to seek work, otherwise the benefit is not payable. What they do in their remaining spare time is their business, not Michaelia Cash's or Peter Dutton's.

MichaelBaron
04-10-2019, 07:19 PM
To receive Newstart payments, recipients must follow an approved Job Plan (https://www.humanservices.gov.au/individuals/services/centrelink/special-benefit/managing-your-payment/mutual-obligation-requirements) to seek work, otherwise the benefit is not payable. What they do in their remaining spare time is their business, not Michaelia Cash's or Peter Dutton's.

As long as there is no evidence that they campaign day and night ..and that leaves little time for other activities...

MichaelBaron
04-10-2019, 07:20 PM
Professional protesters if they exist are doing the high moral act they their less responsible fellow human can't handle. I sometimes feel I am letting the team down by being too preoccupied expanding my income. Every thing just takes longer than expected. But I highly satisfied that a new generation of environmental protesters are taking up the fight. My generation's struggle was not in vain though not always successful. I still can't fathom how religious followers can let their creator's creatures be vanished off the planet by climate change etc.

So YOU feed them if you think so..I do not want to~!

Ian Murray
04-10-2019, 08:04 PM
As long as there is no evidence that they campaign day and night ..and that leaves little time for other activities...

How can they campaign day and night while meeting their Newstart obligations?

antichrist
05-10-2019, 12:22 AM
So YOU feed them if you think so..I do not want to~!
Sure as long as you apply that principle across the board. When conscription was on to kill or be killed we were too young to have the vote. My argument was that the parents who voted for conscription should be forced to enlist their sons and those whom voted against miss out. But strangely your side of politics did not appreciate. Would you now agree with? I should not have to pay for religious chaplains in public schools nor for embassies in Israel.

Ian Murray
05-10-2019, 06:57 PM
A landmark report confirms Australia is girt by hotter, higher seas. But there’s still time to act (https://blog.csiro.au/ipcc-report-australia-higher-seas/)
CSIROscope
4.10.19

A landmark scientific report has confirmed that climate change is altering the world’s seas and ice at an unprecedented rate. Australia depends on the ocean that surrounds us for our health and prosperity. So what does this mean for us, and life on Earth?

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) findings were launched in Monaco on Wednesday night. They provide the most definitive scientific evidence yet of warmer, more acidic and less productive seas. Glaciers and ice sheets are melting, causing sea level to rise at an accelerating rate.

The implications for Australia are serious. Extreme sea level events that used to hit once a century will occur once a year in many of the world’s coastal places by 2050. This situation is inevitable, even if greenhouse gas emissions are dramatically curbed.

The findings, titled the Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate, strengthen the already compelling case for countries to meet their emission reduction goals under the 2015 Paris agreement.

A rapid and dramatic cut in greenhouse gas emissions would prevent the most catastrophic damage to the ocean and cryosphere (frozen polar and mountain regions). This would help protect the ecosystems and people that rely on them.

The report entailed two years of work by 104 authors and review editors from 36 countries, who assessed nearly 7,000 scientific papers and responded to more than 30,000 review comments....

Ian Murray
06-10-2019, 05:41 PM
Extinction Rebellion Takes Aim at Berlin (https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/the-climate-activists-from-extinction-rebellion-a-1289993.html#ref=nl-international)
Spiegel Online
4.10.19

The climate activists from Extinction Rebellion are tired of compromise and are hoping to use civil disobedience to force politicians to take action on global warming. Next week, they aim to shut down Berlin....

....Block a Road, What You'll Need: A banner long enough for the width of the road; Rebels to hold it; literature to explain your action (and XR's values); a Rebel timekeeper (seven minutes blocking, three minutes off the road, and repeat); cakes for pissed-off drivers (and Rebels to talk to them); flags, badges, stickers and placards; music (it's hard for drivers to go ballistic if you're having a disco); well-being and legal-observer Rebels. (From: "This Is Not a Drill," the Extinction Rebellion handbook)....

Ian Murray
06-10-2019, 09:38 PM
Greta Thunberg
Facebook
February 12 ·

As the rumours, lies and constant leaving out of well established facts continue, please share this newly updated clarification about me and my school strike.
Please help me communicate this to the grown ups who lie about me and family so that I can focus on school instead:

Recently I’ve seen many rumors circulating about me and enormous amounts of hate. This is no surprise to me. I know that since most people are not aware of the full meaning of the climate crisis (which is understandable since it has never been treated as a crisis) a school strike for the climate would seem very strange to people in general.
So let me make some things clear about my school strike.

In may 2018 I was one of the winners in a writing competition about the environment held by Svenska Dagbladet, a Swedish newspaper. I got my article published and some people contacted me, among others was Bo Thorén from Fossil Free Dalsland. He had some kind of group with people, especially youth, who wanted to do something about the climate crisis.
I had a few phone meetings with other activists. The purpose was to come up with ideas of new projects that would bring attention to the climate crisis. Bo had a few ideas of things we could do. Everything from marches to a loose idea of some kind of a school strike (that school children would do something on the schoolyards or in the classrooms). That idea was inspired by the Parkland Students, who had refused to go to school after the school shootings.
I liked the idea of a school strike. So I developed that idea and tried to get the other young people to join me, but no one was really interested. They thought that a Swedish version of the Zero Hour march was going to have a bigger impact. So I went on planning the school strike all by myself and after that I didn’t participate in any more meetings.

When I told my parents about my plans they weren’t very fond of it. They did not support the idea of school striking and they said that if I were to do this I would have to do it completely by myself and with no support from them.
On the 20 of august I sat down outside the Swedish Parliament. I handed out fliers with a long list of facts about the climate crisis and explanations on why I was striking. The first thing I did was to post on Twitter and Instagram what I was doing and it soon went viral. Then journalists and newspapers started to come. A Swedish entrepreneur and business man active in the climate movement, Ingmar Rentzhog, was among the first to arrive. He spoke with me and took pictures that he posted on Facebook. That was the first time I had ever met or spoken with him. I had not communicated or encountered with him ever before.

Many people love to spread rumors saying that I have people ”behind me” or that I’m being ”paid” or ”used” to do what I’m doing. But there is no one ”behind” me except for myself. My parents were as far from climate activists as possible before I made them aware of the situation.
I am not part of any organization. I sometimes support and cooperate with several NGOs that work with the climate and environment. But I am absolutely independent and I only represent myself. And I do what I do completely for free, I have not received any money or any promise of future payments in any form at all. And nor has anyone linked to me or my family done so.
And of course it will stay this way. I have not met one single climate activist who is fighting for the climate for money. That idea is completely absurd.
Furthermore I only travel with permission from my school and my parents pay for tickets and accommodations.

My family has written a book together about our family and how me and my sister Beata have influenced my parents way of thinking and seeing the world, especially when it comes to the climate. And about our diagnoses.
That book was due to be released in May. But since there was a major disagreement with the book company, we ended up changing to a new publisher and so the book was released in august instead.
Before the book was released my parents made it clear that their possible profits from the book ”Scener ur hjärtat” will be going to 8 different charities working with environment, children with diagnoses and animal rights.

And yes, I write my own speeches. But since I know that what I say is going to reach many, many people I often ask for input. I also have a few scientists that I frequently ask for help on how to express certain complicated matters. I want everything to be absolutely correct so that I don’t spread incorrect facts, or things that can be misunderstood.

Some people mock me for my diagnosis. But Asperger is not a disease, it’s a gift. People also say that since I have Asperger I couldn’t possibly have put myself in this position. But that’s exactly why I did this. Because if I would have been ”normal” and social I would have organized myself in an organisation, or started an organisation by myself. But since I am not that good at socializing I did this instead. I was so frustrated that nothing was being done about the climate crisis and I felt like I had to do something, anything. And sometimes NOT doing things - like just sitting down outside the parliament - speaks much louder than doing things. Just like a whisper sometimes is louder than shouting.

Also there is one complaint that I ”sound and write like an adult”. And to that I can only say; don’t you think that a 16-year old can speak for herself? There’s also some people who say that I oversimplify things. For example when I say that "the climate crisis is a black and white issue”, ”we need to stop the emissions of greenhouse gases” and ”I want you to panic”. But that I only say because it’s true. Yes, the climate crisis is the most complex issue that we have ever faced and it’s going to take everything from our part to ”stop it”. But the solution is black and white; we need to stop the emissions of greenhouse gases.
Because either we limit the warming to 1,5 degrees C over pre industrial levels, or we don’t. Either we reach a tipping point where we start a chain reaction with events way beyond human control, or we don’t. Either we go on as a civilization, or we don’t. There are no gray areas when it comes to survival.
And when I say that I want you to panic I mean that we need to treat the crisis as a crisis. When your house is on fire you don’t sit down and talk about how nice you can rebuild it once you put out the fire. If your house is on fire you run outside and make sure that everyone is out while you call the fire department. That requires some level of panic.

There is one other argument that I can’t do anything about. And that is the fact that I’m ”just a child and we shouldn’t be listening to children.” But that is easily fixed - just start to listen to the rock solid science instead. Because if everyone listened to the scientists and the facts that I constantly refer to - then no one would have to listen to me or any of the other hundreds of thousands of school children on strike for the climate across the world. Then we could all go back to school.
I am just a messenger, and yet I get all this hate. I am not saying anything new, I am just saying what scientists have repeatedly said for decades. And I agree with you, I’m too young to do this. We children shouldn’t have to do this. But since almost no one is doing anything, and our very future is at risk, we feel like we have to continue.


And if you have any other concern or doubt about me, then you can listen to my TED talk ( https://www.ted.com/…/greta_thunberg_the_disarming_…/up-next ), in which I talk about how my interest for the climate and environment began.

And thank you everyone for your kind support! It brings me hope.
/Greta

Ps I was briefly a youth advisor for the board of the non profit foundation “We don’t have time”. It turns out they used my name as part of another branch of their organisation that is a start up business. They have admitted clearly that they did so without the knowledge of me or my family. I no longer have any connection to “We don’t have time”. Nor does anyone in my family. They have deeply apologised for what has happened and I have accepted their apology.

MichaelBaron
07-10-2019, 04:11 PM
https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/climate-change/climate-change-protesters-bid-to-bring-chaos-to-melbourne-starts-out-small/news-story/70539cbf38c343be7de630d2b504035d?fbclid=IwAR3nSWeD 31KogNMOOaQOlFMrDYYmg2pOT47ED5TIK5k1xLZj-4IrdWQBD30

Looks like some of them have finally got jobs to do...

Or may be the threat to strip them of Centerlink benefits worked :)

Ian Murray
07-10-2019, 06:49 PM
https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/climate-change/climate-change-protesters-bid-to-bring-chaos-to-melbourne-starts-out-small/news-story/70539cbf38c343be7de630d2b504035d?fbclid=IwAR3nSWeD 31KogNMOOaQOlFMrDYYmg2pOT47ED5TIK5k1xLZj-4IrdWQBD30

Looks like some of them have finally got jobs to do...

Or may be the threat to strip them of Centerlink benefits worked :)

A strange mindset. In your view there is a cohort of Australians who work for a living, and a completely separate cohort who join protests. In the real world the two overlap significantly.