• 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

Louden Wilde said:
Yeah - I don't think human impact on the ecosystem (via climate change, pollution) gets enough coverage.
Click to expand...

It's a difficult thing to sell, not helped by a lot of the media coverage - and Al Gore - at the start of the hard sell, being very badly done.

Covid's been an excellent learning curve - if we can't deal with an immediate threat, what chance is there of dealing with one in the far future. My suspicion for years has been that by the time people accept the need to change, it will already be far too late.

We may have even passed that point.
 
I don't think human impact on the ecosystem (via climate change, pollution) gets enough coverage.

The media companies are businesses the make money by attracting the largest viewership possible so advertisers will pay more for commercial slots. People didn't want to hear about climate change out of fear or for other types of motivated reasoning so that would hurt the companies bottom line.
When I was younger I used to believe that the news media was out to help society.

Fox News has been ripping North America apart and the owners live in Australia.
 
A recent post from James Hansen claims that not only has climate change accelerated in the last five or six years but there is now an extra source of warming that can't be explained by GHG forcings.

Climate change is now happening "Faster than expected" on steroids.
 
Warmer1 said:
A recent post from James Hansen claims that not only has climate change accelerated in the last five or six years but there is now an extra source of warming that can't be explained by GHG forcings.

Climate change is now happening "Faster than expected" on steroids.
Click to expand...

Plenty of climate scientists have a good explanation: because of the tremendous backlash against their predictions over the decades, the constant accusations of fear mongering, scientists have tended to publish the lower, not upper end of the predictions of their models when it comes to climate change.
 
Under reporting has been the norm for a long time, as was the pace of climate change, and the IPCC takes a lot of heat for being too conservative but they won't report things that are too uncertain. These recent recording are different. There has been an acceleration from the long term trend line and there are additional changes that are also increasing the global temperature (clouds ?).

I am working 13 hours a day and don't have time to log into Columbia University's website to drag out that article but as for you claim that political organizations are being too conservative James Hansen writes "The bad news: we approach the gas bag season – the next Conference of the Parties (COP26) is scheduled for November 1-12. Gas bag politicians won’t show you the data that matter because that would reveal their miserable performances. Instead, they set climate goals for their children while adopting no polices that would give such goals a chance. Some of them may have been honestly duped about the science and engineering, but many must be blatant hypocrites."
 
Last edited:
If we have to resort to geoengineering there will be mass opposition from the chemtrail kooks, but totally reasonable folks may side with them in opposing certain projects, like cloud seeding.

It's looking desperate.
 
Warmer1 said:
y.

Fox News has been ripping North America apart and the owners live in Australia.
Click to expand...

Yep, Murdoch. He is toxic. Has had a lesser effect in the UK from newspapers and TV channels. I've seen Fox. No way could you get away with such bias in the UK on TV. The BBC is supposedly neutral. Funded by licence payers. It produces some stunning science programs. Including by everybody's darling, David Attenborough. Who is certainly convinced of AGW. Most of the other major broadcasters don't get into science. News is just news. It isn't opinion. Even the right wing written press here daren't go too far in the direction of Fox. Americans might buy that crap, but pretty much all sides of the political divide here believe AGW is a thing. Ditto in Australia and NZ. And Canada, I assume.
Either the US public is far better educated than everywhere else, and are right to believe the rubbish promoted by the likes of Fox, or they aren't. And just believe any old crap told to them by media outlets.
I know what I think.

And that isn't even getting into the science.
 
In the Murduck speak with forked tongue ...his staff in Australia have to be full vaxxed but he allows the anti-vax idjits full reign in his rags.

So much push back in Australia on his climate crap that

Murdoch Outlets in Australia Plan Reversal on Climate Change https://www.businessinsider.com › Politics › Media
7 Sept 2021 — After decades of dismissing the scientific consensus behind climate change and attacking carbon reduction measures, news outlets owned by Rupert Murdoch in ...
Click to expand...
 
some help

Google prohibits ads that promote or make money from climate change denial

Ban applies to claims that climate change is a hoax, content that denies human activity contributes

The Associated Press · Posted: Oct 08, 2021 11:15 AM ET | Last Updated: October 9

A woman walks below a Google sign on the campus in Mountain View, Calif. On Thursday, the company announced it will restrict digital ads that promote false climate change claims, hoping to stop those making such claims from profiting from them and limit the spread of misinformation on its platform. (Jeff Chiu/The Associated Press)
Google is cracking down on digital ads that promote the idea that climate change is a hoax or make money from that kind of content, hoping to limit revenue for climate change deniers and stop the spread of misinformation on its platforms.

The company said in a blog post on Thursday, Oct. 7 that the new policy will also apply to YouTube, which last week announced a sweeping crackdown of vaccine misinformation.
Click to expand...
more
https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/google-bans-ads-denying-climate-change-1.6204593
 
jonesdave116 said:
Yep, Murdoch. He is toxic. Has had a lesser effect in the UK from newspapers and TV channels. I've seen Fox. No way could you get away with such bias in the UK on TV. The BBC is supposedly neutral. Funded by licence payers. It produces some stunning science programs. Including by everybody's darling, David Attenborough. Who is certainly convinced of AGW. Most of the other major broadcasters don't get into science. News is just news. It isn't opinion. Even the right wing written press here daren't go too far in the direction of Fox. Americans might buy that crap, but pretty much all sides of the political divide here believe AGW is a thing. Ditto in Australia and NZ. And Canada, I assume.
Either the US public is far better educated than everywhere else, and are right to believe the rubbish promoted by the likes of Fox, or they aren't. And just believe any old crap told to them by media outlets.
I know what I think.

And that isn't even getting into the science.
Click to expand...

The fact that Brexit is a thing says otherwise. The right wing in the UK wanted out of the EU so they would no longer have to follow EU rules on issues like climate change, and you can expect meaningful climate action in the UK to stop now.
 
lomiller said:
The right wing in the UK wanted out of the EU so they would no longer have to follow EU rules on issues like climate change, and you can expect meaningful climate action in the UK to stop now.
Click to expand...
Perhaps not 'meaningful', but...

UK car sales plunge but electric vehicles soar to record amid fuel crisis
The number of electric cars sold in the UK last month neared the figures for the whole of 2019, with panic-buying at the petrol pumps expected to accelerate consumer appetite to switch to cleaner vehicles.

Nearly 33,000 pure electric cars were registered in a record month for EVs, almost 50% more than last year, as sales of new cars otherwise tumbled to the weakest September total for more than two decades...

Battery-powered cars took a record slice of the new car market in a month that ended with fuel supply issues dominating the news, as motorists struggled to find petrol or diesel to fill their tanks. About 15% of new cars sold were pure electric, up from 11% in August...

Jamie Hamilton, automotive director at Deloitte, added: “The inconvenience of long queues and empty pumps has jump-started many motorists to explore the switch to electric.”
Click to expand...

Unintended consequences aren't always a bad thing. Leaving the EU precipitated a fuel crisis, which caused more people to see the advantages of electric cars. So instead of stopping climate action, leaving the EU is accelerating it!
 
I see Norway is the country getting to zero carbon first.
This country of 5 million has 1 trillion euros in the bank, and I am wondering where that money came from, not.
This highlights the absurdity of looking for carbon zero in a timely fashion.
 
Initially from oil and gas but they have translated that in 2% of the world's equity.
Not sure why you have a problem with that?
DO you expect them to stop extracting a commodity that still has a likely 30 year life and perhaps may be increasing in value as supply tightens.

We are not getting to carbon neutral without extacting carbon from the atmosphere as well as reducing emmissions.

Norway has started work on Project Longship, a €1.7 billion project that could bury vast amounts of captured carbon under the North Sea in an effort to slow climate change. Named Project Longship, the initiative will involve injecting carbon dioxide captured from factory emissions in depleted oil and gas fields.
Click to expand...
 
Anthropogenic Climate Change

Perhaps I've missed it somewhere. I have been away for a while so I apologize if so, but shouldn't there be a sub topic on AGW here of all places?

I invite those with at least a high school science education to try to educate the professional science deniers at CFACT.ORG and other Trumpist websites.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom