• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: Global warming discussion V

We will, but only after our noses have been well and truly rubbed in it. And 'conservatives' will be wailing "If only we had known what the effects of global warming would be - why didn't you tell us?".

unfortunately this is a major contributor to my dismal outlook regarding the fate of our nation, global civilization, ...and quite possibly, our species.
 
unfortunately this is a major contributor to my dismal outlook regarding the fate of our nation, global civilization, ...and quite possibly, our species.
Yes
Obviously China and India are entitled to raise expectations of their citizens to become deliberate tourists.
Norway will be carbon neutral by 2030 locally but have a trillion dollar sovereign trust now and exported 200 billion oil and gas calendar year.

Trakar, your view seems cast in stone.
 
An interview with a conspiracy nutjob and climate change denier who denied climate change? I'd say it went exactly as planned.



Really? I did not hear him deny climate change. Climate changes. Often. He described a cycle of change the newsreader did not want to acknowledge.
 
Last edited:
Really? I did not hear him deny climate change. Climate changes. Often. He described a cycle of change the newsreader did not want to acknowledge.

Let me guess: he pointed out that climate changes naturally, and insisted that means that the current climate change is also natural.

Which is like pointing out that forest fires happen naturally, and insisting that means that the fire currently raging in a forest where there hasn't been any lightning for months, and where a bunch of kids were seen fooling around with matches at the exact time and place it started, is also natural.

ETA: clicked on the link out of curiosity to see if I was right and it's an interview with Piers Corbyn!
 
Last edited:
Really? I did not hear him deny climate change. Climate changes. Often. He described a cycle of change the newsreader did not want to acknowledge.

How "often" do you think climate changes?
Do you think climate changes due to magic or due to physical reasons scientists can study and understand?
When climate does change, how much do you think it changes?
When climate does change, how quickly do you think it changes?
When climate does change, how much do you think it changes the world?
 
I was mildly amused to hear Corbyn claim at the beginning of that intervew to have predicted this summer would be hot. Some years ago, on a predecessor of this thread, I tested his claim of 80% accuracy by following ten of his predictions, kindly shared by a cheerleader of his, over the course of a year; just two proved right, and that was me being generous. One of his predictions was that Britain's spring would be cooler than average that year, and it was actually the warmest ever recorded (and I'm talking about the 350 year Central England record here). There's a famous prediction of his from towards the end of the so-called pause in the warming, around 2009, that the world would cool from then on.
 
Renewable Energy Company Cuts Down Primary Forest

A company that has received billions of pounds in green energy subsidies from UK taxpayers is cutting down environmentally-important forests, a BBC Panorama investigation has found.

Drax runs Britain's biggest power station, which burns millions of tonnes of imported wood pellets - which is classed as renewable energy.

The BBC has discovered some of the wood comes from primary forests in Canada.

The company says it only uses sawdust and waste wood.

Panorama analysed satellite images, traced logging licences and used drone filming to prove its findings. Reporter Joe Crowley also followed a truck from a Drax mill to verify it was picking up whole logs from an area of precious forest.

Ecologist Michelle Connolly told Panorama the company was destroying forests that had taken thousands of years to develop.

"It's really a shame that British taxpayers are funding this destruction with their money. Logging natural forests and converting them into pellets to be burned for electricity, that is absolutely insane," she said.
 
Logging natural forests and converting them into pellets to be burned for electricity, that is absolutely insane," she said.
Devil is in the details. Its better than burning fossil fuels and the Scandanavian countries rely on pellet stoves for heating.
Cutting old growth forests is verboten but using the debris from the cutting and resultant sawdust, damaged trees and branches simply accelerates what happens over time in a forest anyways.
Tricky topic.
 
There seems to be this assumption, that if we "save the planet" for our children, they will do a better job of taking care of it than we did..

It has always been outliers who take this stuff seriously, and there aren't enough of them to make a difference..
 
There seems to be this assumption, that if we "save the planet" for our children, they will do a better job of taking care of it than we did..

For what it's worth, what we do is on us. What they do is on them. That they might mess things up is no excuse for us to preemptively mess things up.
 
Last edited:
There seems to be this assumption, that if we "save the planet" for our children, they will do a better job of taking care of it than we did..
Of course they will. They grew up in a time when people were talking about it. We didn't. Their baseline assumptions are different.

It has always been outliers who take this stuff seriously, and there aren't enough of them to make a difference..
That has been true in the past, but society is in the process of changing. For the better.
 
Devil is in the details. Its better than burning fossil fuels and the Scandanavian countries rely on pellet stoves for heating.
Cutting old growth forests is verboten but using the debris from the cutting and resultant sawdust, damaged trees and branches simply accelerates what happens over time in a forest anyways.
Tricky topic.

Agreed, the primary difference to me is scale, whether we are talking about efficient pelletized systems or cords of firewood stacked outside homes. If we are talking about small scale, local, systems using farmed timber and/or waste, thinnings and trimmings, this wood fuel is not endangering forests, is carbon neutral and is at this scale sustainable. If however, this is being looked at to replace fossil fuels on a large scale globally, it is entirely unsuitable and impractical.
 
Yes
Obviously China and India are entitled to raise expectations of their citizens to become deliberate tourists.
Norway will be carbon neutral by 2030 locally but have a trillion dollar sovereign trust now and exported 200 billion oil and gas calendar year.

Trakar, your view seems cast in stone.

Well, I try not to cast many stones, but yeah, it is putting a real bummer on my plans about living to 150!
 

Back
Top Bottom