Cant wait for climate change to kick in...

This will be the climate change knowing our luck

What happened to "global warming" ????

The flooding of East Anglia
Growing our own grapes
Living nearer the sea
Warmer temps
Increased tourism and revenue

I was looking forward to all that .....

Philly8mt wrote:

What happened to "global warming" ????

It stopped being called Global Warming when the actual evidence started showing that the earth was getting hotter SLOWER than it should have been in it geological cycle.

Then it became Climate Change to keep all the guys in hairy jumpers and all the politico's with a vested interest in work. There is a lot of money in this Global Environmentalism lark and most of it is built on the premise of man sorting out the world that man has evidently buggered up.

Still its sobering to know that the worlds climactic conditions are effected by the actions of mankind :roll: Ice ages anyone??

The UK climate is warm for its latitude thanks in part to the jet stream. All you need is a slight change and we might lose it. That would mean we might have winters more like New York which I think most people sort of think is round about at the same latitude as the UK when in fact it is more like the same latitude as Southern Italy.

Coach H wrote:

Philly8mt wrote:

What happened to "global warming" ????

It stopped being called Global Warming when the actual evidence started showing that the earth was getting hotter SLOWER than it should have been in it geological cycle.

Then it became Climate Change to keep all the guys in hairy jumpers and all the politico's with a vested interest in work. There is a lot of money in this Global Environmentalism lark and most of it is built on the premise of man sorting out the world that man has evidently buggered up.

Still its sobering to know that the worlds climactic conditions are effected by the actions of mankind :roll: Ice ages anyone??

Couldn't agree more.
Of course the planets climate is changing, it has been doing so for over 4 billion years. As stated, ice ages came and went without man's interference. In fact the planet became a huge snowball with ice almost completely covering its surface, at least once. Even the magnetic field flips periodically without any help from man.
Man certainly is having a detrimental effect on the environment and the planets resources have to be managed better, but screaming 'man made climate change' after every storm or heatwave is ridiculous and just adds to skepticism that it is being used as an excuse to raise tax.

STOP! You need to watch this before saying another word: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQlHaGhYoF0

Coach H wrote:

It stopped being called Global Warming when the actual evidence started showing that the earth was getting hotter SLOWER than it should have been in it geological cycle.

Global warming is still very much in use as a term. Type "Global warming" into Google Scholar and limit the search to papers published in 2013. There are loads.

Short-term slowdowns, standstills and even reverses aren't unexpected. It's the long-term trend which is important, and choosing 1998 (a very strong el nino year) as a starting point and then declaring that global warming has ended or is no longer a problem is complete guff.

Coach H wrote:

Then it became Climate Change

The term climate change has been used for decades.

Coach H wrote:

to keep all the guys in hairy jumpers and all the politico's with a vested interest in work. There is a lot of money in this Global Environmentalism lark and most of it is built on the premise of man sorting out the world that man has evidently buggered up.

So, instead of making money out of the many, many genuine environmental problems, they decided to invent one?

Coach H wrote:

Still its sobering to know that the worlds climactic conditions are effected by the actions of mankind :roll: Ice ages anyone??

Actually you're right, all those climate scientists, geologists, etc. probably never realised that the climate has natural variations. You should write them a letter.

On a less sarcastic note, climate scientists do know that the climate has always changed in the past. That's why they had the cunning plan of STUDYING the climate and looking for the types of evidence that would indicate human-induced warning.

Ballysmate wrote:

screaming 'man made climate change' after every storm or heatwave is ridiculous and just adds to skepticism that it is being used as an excuse to raise tax.

After just about every single extreme event, scientists usually make it quite clear that individual events SHOULDN'T be blamed on climate change.

Ballysmate wrote:

After just about every single extreme event, scientists usually make it quite clear that individual events SHOULDN'T be blamed on climate change.

Perhaps true. But scientists don't set tax levies do they?

No they don't. But the existence of a problem is not based on the wisdom (or lack of) of the policies put forward as a response. For example, should we be funding nuclear fusion research instead of wind turbines? No idea, I'm not a physicist or an engineer, but even if a load of money is wasted on useless technology, that doesn't change what is going on in our planet's atmosphere at the moment.

Doing my bit.

Gas guzzler and lots of air travel for me.

The trouble is that the media pictured global warming in the wrong way. Global warming never meant turning the UK into a tropical climate. That is why they switched to climate change as a term.

The frequency and severity of these storms is pretty consistent with a warmer Atlantic. Warmer equals wetter for maritime climates.

If anyone doubts that a few ppm can have a big effect on anything, talk to Liestrong who only ever had a few ppb of active ingredient compared to body weight.

Pollution is a by product of over population. This is the elephant in the room.

andi1363 wrote:

Pollution is a by product of over population. This is the elephant in the room.

Population has been discussed on many threads in BR. The consensus and in fact the reality is not over-poulation, it is the imbalance of the consumption of resources. 1/5th of the worlds population consume 4/5ths of it's resources.
Man with 7 kids in Manilla living in a shanti town has a carbon/environmental footprint which is negligible.
Single bloke living in Bachelor pad in London, owns car, fly's to exotic holidays in the West Indies, has gas central heating, PC's. ipads/tablets, buys clothes regularly etc etc has a huge environmental impact.
Unless the affluent over consumptive sector of the population are not prepared to make sacrifices, we're fooked.

VTech wrote:

We need to stop volcanos and geezers.
While we are at it, feed animals food that stops flatulence.

The first line is about carbon emissions. As I said before, I am not convinced by the arguments.

The second line is a litmus test of our consumption. North America and in fact, Western Europeans are eating more and more meat. To breed more cattle, you need more land.
To feed bovine animals you need vast areas of agricultural land. Chop some rainforest down, grow Soya for 2 years until the ground is fallow and then chop some more rainforest down. So much hydrogenated oil is Soya to make the hot dog and Hmaburger rolls, pastries, fast foodstuffs etc etc.
The Americans financed the building of a port south of Sao Paulo which is intended to meet future demand and is running at a quarter of it's capacity - frightening.

team47b wrote:

Feeling pedantic this morning...the ground doesn't become 'fallow' it becomes infertile.

there’s a difference between “fully hydrogenated” and “partially hydrogenated” oils, partially hydrogenated oil contains trans fat, fully hydrogenated oil does not, as the hydrogenation process continues the molecular transformation of the fatty acids from trans fat into saturated fatty acids. Fully hydrogenated soybean oil is still not a healthy choice.

And good old Monsanto have now genetically modified soy beans so that they don't need to be hydrogenated so we can now sleep easy in our beds now that our best interests are being served :roll:

With due respect to the pedantics sir, it does not detract from the fact that vast swathes of land is required to grow the stuff.

...and soya