hogmaw Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 About time too. I have a science background and this programme is saying exactly what I have been thinking for some time. Don't feel guilty driving your gas guzzlers folks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R3DG3CKO ROB Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 Damn straight.... only common sense if you ask me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edge Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 Its those damm Cows that keep farting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbourner Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 What's it about then? What's the swindle? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juanchan Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 What's it about then? What's the swindle? In short, if greenhouse gases are trapping the reflected solar radiation and heating the planet, the atmosphere should be warming up, which it isn't Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilli Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 I read somewhere else that we could be on the brink of the next iceage, what gives - truth is they probably don't know, it's a chaotic system in a fine balance, best not to prod it too much in case it does change wildly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pixelfill Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 seems to have no relationship to CO2 at all, but one hell of a corellation with Solar activity ! Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terribleturner Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 Damn it i was bloody watching the crap Hotel Babylon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 I reckon it'll all boil down to the US and it's friends wanting to cut the ability of the developing nations to grow so as to maintain their own positions as world leaders of industry. ...or something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiten55 Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 Damn it i was bloody watching the crap Hotel Babylon im i the only person that loves this prog? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garethr Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 I have no idea whether global warming is fact or fiction, but I do wonder what would have happened had there been politicians, lobby groups, and the media 10,000 years ago, when a mile of ice was melting over Britain Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike B Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 I did a full course on this at uni; paleoenvironmental reconstruction. Did you know that there were vine fields in yorkshire during roman times? we are on the way to a new ice age if you follow the cyclical nature of our climate.. global warming is happening, (it should be cooling) and a good thing too or we'd be freezing our asses off. at full ice age the ice sheet was a mile thick over my house! Humanity has hacked the planet are around a lot, but it's such a complicated thing that it proves hard to measure accurately over short time periods. no one has the answer right now. Also - we are due another extiction level meteor strike within the immediate future. One of these will piss the climate off somewhat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pabs Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 Also - we are due another extiction level meteor strike within the immediate future. One of these will piss the climate off somewhat. I can guarantee you that the day I buy a Supra will be the same day as the aforementioned meteor strike. It'll be just my s*dding luck..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garethr Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 we are due another extiction level meteor strike within the immediate future. One of these will piss the climate off somewhat.Don't forget the supervolcanoes.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pixelfill Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 Also - we are due another extiction level meteor strike within the immediate future. One of these will piss the climate off somewhat. Was that not on the radio this morning ?? Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdavies Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 Finally, a program that put my point across. Every time I have tried in the past to explain to folk why I think the current "environmental models" that are used over and over again (almost to the point of becoming religious dogma) are inadequate and are derived from over simplified, cherry picked principles glossing over large assumptions, ignoring huge external purturbations (this has been sticking in my craw for some time, as the scientist in me was weeping at all the sensationalised bull that is repeatedly recycled). I have to admit I seemed to be frowned upon for my "outrageous" views that the popular "science" has us all causing the next ice age prematurely was in fact a load of crap. Shame that a lot of the "theories" are being so well believed in some areas that it is creeping into real curriculum material and passed off as proven theories based on fully functioning environmental models (* cough * bullshit * cough *). Hahaha, oops waiting to get stoned! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hogmaw Posted March 8, 2007 Author Share Posted March 8, 2007 What's it about then? What's the swindle? In a nutshell... As far as the atmosphere is concerned, increased CO2 emissions from man this past century or so amount to absolutelly sod all, and even then CO2 is NOT a pollutant that causes global warming. In fact, global warming CAUSES an increase in CO2, not the other way round! If anything it's the sun that causes most of our climate changes, and the current global warming we are experiencing is because of changes in the sun behaviour eg sun spots etc. The CO2/global warming phoenomenon has been invented and manipulated by journalists and politicians to serve their own agendas ie keeping themselves busy and in a job. Also to stop people in the 3rd world from using fossil fuels to develop their nations - so we can have their oil and coal instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Wannabe Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 Who'd of thought it, the sun is causing global warming! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tannhauser Posted March 8, 2007 Share Posted March 8, 2007 Finally, a program that put my point across. Every time I have tried in the past to explain to folk why I think the current "environmental models" that are used over and over again (almost to the point of becoming religious dogma) are inadequate and are derived from over simplified, cherry picked principles glossing over large assumptions, ignoring huge external purturbations (this has been sticking in my craw for some time, as the scientist in me was weeping at all the sensationalised bull that is repeatedly recycled). I have to admit I seemed to be frowned upon for my "outrageous" views that the popular "science" has us all causing the next ice age prematurely was in fact a load of crap. Shame that a lot of the "theories" are being so well believed in some areas that it is creeping into real curriculum material and passed off as proven theories based on fully functioning environmental models (* cough * bullshit * cough *). Hahaha, oops waiting to get stoned! Stoned on here? Surely not. The concept of climate change resulting from human intervention is about as popular as a broken leg. Besides, Jeremy Clarkson says it isn't true nearly every week. I didn't see the programme, so I can't base my judgement on anything other than the precis on here. Science is almost never a matter of fact, it's a matter of a balance of evidence. Media graduates who report on science rarely understand this and paint every scientist with a dissenting opinion as some sort of visionary who is bravely speaking out against 'scientific dogma'. Honestly, if they found someone who said the earth was flat, he'd be subject of a documentary bemoaning the fact that the establishment just wouldn't listen. Point is that on any scientific matter you can always find a spectrum of opinion, Science exists only as strong or weak consensus. How strong is the consensus on human intervention in climate change? Most reviews agree that it is astonishingly strong. The extraordinarily spirited attempts of the American energy lobby to discredit the idea have all but petered out (how about that list of '10,000 scientists who don't believe in global warming' that turned out to have Mickey Mouse and co. amonst the signatories?). The USA really didn't want to buy the idea, but the Federal Climate Change Program released their assessment about this time last year - they said that change could not be explained by natural processes. I have a science background, but I don't feel qualified to challenge the validity of the complex evidence that supports or undermines these theories. I'll leave that for the climate scientists. However, Ifind the idea that thousands of scientists from many disciplines have somehow been hoodwinked because they have missed some facile point completely risible. Or alternatively, and even more ridiculous, that they have all jumped on some bandwagon because they were too lazy or biased to properly examine the data. Scientific theories, critics point out, sometimes turn out to be incorrect. This is the criticism often levelled by Creationists at another theory that has around the same level of consensus as human intervention in climate change - that of evolution. Not everyone who faces down the establishment is a lone voice of reason. They laughed at daVinci, they laughed at Galileo...but they also laughed at David Icke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tannhauser Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Interesting article: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn10445-climate-change-special-state-of-denial.html A snippet: Many of the IPCC's authors, some of whom asked not to be named...... claim there is an extensive network of lobby groups and scientists involved in making the case against the IPCC and its reports. Automobile, coal and oil companies have coordinated and funded past attacks on them, the scientists say. Sometimes this has been done through Washington lobby groups such as the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), whose officers include Myron Ebell, a former climate negotiator for George W. Bush's administration. Recently, the CEI made television advertisements arguing against climate change, one of which ended with the words: "Carbon dioxide, they call it pollution, we call it life." CEI's past funders include ExxonMobil, General Motors and the Ford Motor Company. The money trail Some sceptical scientists are funded directly by industry. In July, The Washington Post published a leaked letter from the Intermountain Rural Electric Association (IREA), an energy company based in Colorado, that exhorted power companies to support the work of the prominent sceptic Pat Michaels of the University of Virginia, Charlottesville. Worried about the potential cost of cleaning up coal-fired power plants to reduce their CO2 emissions, IREA's general manager, Stanley Lewandowski, wrote: "We believe that it is necessary to support the scientific community that is willing to stand up against the alarmists... In February this year, IREA alone contributed $100,000 to Dr Michaels." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdavies Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 I recommend watching the program at very least Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonW Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 It was a great programme and presented far more evidence against C02 causing warming than I have seen for it in the last 10 years since it's been a popular theory. It was interesting to see that in the 70s all the news reports were warning of Global Cooling and that we were heading into an ice age. Also scientist get funding for research much more easily if there is an element of Global Warming study going on in their studies. I think it also said that the natural world produces 30 times more CO2 a year than man does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbourner Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 It's all media vs media though at the end of the day. The next programme that comes along saying our CO2 emissions are causing global warming will be just as believable as this programme was - they all have an agenda or at least their own point to put across, they'll all gloss over everyone else's points of view and 'evidence' to put their own points in the limelight. Without the proper knowledge I wouldn't like to make a judgement either way, I saw a programme a couple of years ago showing how the world was heating up because of this and that and how it was masking global cooling and we need to stop what we're doing etc. It was very good and a little disturbing, made me want to recycle! but if I'd seen this one I dare say it would turn me around somewhat to think differently. I think in future I'll take each piece of information on it's own merits, and try not to get sucked in by one or the other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonball Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 I convenient untruth? Kevin Trenberth reckons he is a marked man. He has argued that last year's devastating Atlantic hurricane season, which spawned hurricane Katrina, was linked to global warming. For the many politicians and minority of scientists who insist there is no evidence for any such link, Trenberth's views are unacceptable and some have called for him step down from an international panel studying climate change. "The attacks on me are clearly designed to get me fired or to resign," says Trenberth. The attacks fit a familiar pattern. Sceptics have also set their sights on scientists who have spoken out about the accelerating meltdown of the ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica and the thawing of the planet's permafrost. These concerns will be addressed in the next report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the global organisation created by the UN in 1988 to assess the risks of human-induced climate change. Every time one of these assessments is released, about once every five years, some of the American scientists who have played a part in producing it become the targets of concerted attacks apparently designed to bring down their reputations and careers. At stake is the credibility of scientists who fear our planet is hurtling towards disaster and want to warn the public in the US and beyond Everyone can now go back to bed safe in the knowledge that we can continue to pollute the earth Unfortunately I would have liked a balanced programme with some debate both for and against to weigh up the realities v hype Undoubtably there is a great deal of money (and votes) at stake from the 'poluters' (including USA, China and India!) and the New Scientist article throws in sharp contrast the dangers that the pro-CO2 problem scientists have - namely they face funds being taken away and ostritchization if they continue to warn people of the 'dangers' of global warming IMHO - why take the chance they might be right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ark Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 I missed the program. Is it scheduled to be repeated, does anyone know? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.