Attenborough scaremongering?

Jimmy_oc1998

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Climate change is extremely alarming.

Ah sure **** it. It's going to end one day anyways. Once you come to realise that even if we ate grass and shat in the back garden there will come a time when the last human on earth dies, it all becomes less alarming.

ollkiller

Here's the thing. If climate change is real or not it's still good practice to not cut down rain forests, pollute our planet with plastic waste and overfish our seas.

kneemos

valoren wrote: »

Scaremonger is a loaded word but to scaremonger about climate change is actually a good thing and very apt. And even if it did turn out to be a load of bollox, a conspiracy etc then to ardently draw attention to what's happening can only have a positive effect.

Lies will damage the cause.

GLaDOS

If it's a choice between conservativewoman.co.uk and David Attenborough, I know which horse I'm backing.

Jimmy_oc1998

ollkiller wrote: »

Here's the thing. If climate change is real or not it's still good practice to not cut down rain forests, pollute our planet with plastic waste and overfish our seas.

Obvious rebuttal to that is everyone is campaigning for more taxes so essentially you'd be making your life harder for no reason.

JJayoo

I remember the last time climate change was the hot topic and then a world recession kicked in so everyone switched from save the climate to save the economy and screw stupid climate. Will we see another world recession kick in, a manufactured one?

Climate change is the home of virtue signalling gimps who will never actually do something constructive about it.

lets compare the multimillionaire actor crying about climate change from their private jet to this guy (see short video)

Christ if you really wanted to help the environment give this man a few million euro per year

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-foEwcAu_zw

Yurt2

Sometimes I wonder if General Pinochet isn't actually dead and is in fact running a load of multis on boards.ie to keep his mind alert in his dotage.

James Brown

rafatoni wrote: »

i thought his brother was better..

You're thinking of Jeff Goldblum.

AtomicHorror

Jimmy_oc1998 wrote: »

I didn't see many people worried about the climate when billions was donated to Notre Dame? Those billions could have cleaned up a lot of oceans and planted lots of trees.

Odd, my memory is of an almost immediate backlash from several different sectors claiming to be of greater importance. The Yellow Vests had a field day, for example.

You're overstating the impact of billions though. Fixing the global climate is obviously going to take infinitely more money than fixing some church.

mad muffin

Here’s the deal…

Fûck off with your climate change. There is fück all I can do more than I’m already doing.

I recycle all I can. Yet companies keep selling shît in stuff I can’t even recycle, and my recycling is ending up in a land dump in some foreign country anyway.

I only own one car.

I own a modest home that needs minimal heating and no cooling.

I rarely fly in a plane.

I don’t spew forth toxins into the atmosphere or the waterways.

Any appliance I have I try to fix when it breaks down.

I don’t go chopping forests down.

What needs to happen for any meaningful change is for them to go bleating to the governments and the companies and the rich folk who own dozens of properties, cars, flys every second day in a jet.

There is fúck all else we can do it’s in their laps but they will do fúck all because they say it’s up to us.

Well then bend over and kiss your arse goodbye cause the planet is up to shît if we have to depend on them bunch of fücking arseholes.

mcmoustache

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Sarcasm?

Ever heard of rule 34?

In a similar vein, for even the most stupid idea that you can make up, there is someone on the internet who believes it. See Flat Earthers, for example.

Hobosan

All the politicians are campaigning to attract more industry and tackle climate change... hmmm

AtomicHorror

mcmoustache wrote: »

Ever heard of rule 34?

In a similar vein, for even the most stupid idea that you can make up, there is someone on the internet who believes it. See Flat Earthers, for example.

On the flip side, there's Poe's Law, so you can understand why sometimes people feel the need to ask that incredulous question.

Jimmy_oc1998 wrote: »

Ah sure **** it. It's going to end one day anyways. Once you come to realise that even if we ate grass and shat in the back garden there will come a time when the last human on earth dies, it all becomes less alarming.

Unless you have kids, or other people you care about in the world, or a conscience generally, or empathy, or have thought past the painfully obvious idea of "everything turns to **** in the end" even for a few minutes.

Seriously, you think you're privy to some special revelation with this fatalistic teenagers life philosophy?

Dohnjoe

JJayoo wrote: »

I remember the last time climate change was the hot topic and then a world recession kicked in so everyone switched from save the climate to save the economy and screw stupid climate.

Wow

"Your hot topic can be the climate or the economy, but never ever both, choose wisely.."

The Oort Cloud

ollkiller wrote: »

Here's the thing. If climate change is real or not it's still good practice to not cut down rain forests, pollute our planet with plastic waste and overfish our seas.

I think every-one agrees that climate change is real, as the climate has been naturally changing for millions of years and longer, Natural climate change is just that 'Natural', and we will no doubt have another ice-age in the future and also much warmer periods like the medieval warm period, and this is a natural cycle of our planet.



But these alarmist nutcases want to completely stop and interfere with the earths natural cycles, and they think that puny humans are going to cause something that already exists 'Climate Change'. Not one scientist or climatologist on this planet fully understands how the climate actually works, but yet they think they know the exact change variables humans are supposed to accumulate to it when they do not even fully understand climate.



So-called man-made global warming as it was originally called is the biggest money making scam in the history of the world. Tax the worlds population for something that always existed... Natural climate change.

JJayoo

There is very little signs that the government is willing to invest in environmental projects even thou we are reminds frequently that we are gonna be hit with huge fines from Europe.

There are a large amount of solar farms which have been given the go ahead but construction is being put off as the government will not guarantee a price for the electricity. Solar farms can still be grazed by sheep, the construction is minimal when you compare them to turbines and they are beneficial to insects and small rodents as they offer cover. Clean energy but government is much happier to be hit with fines.

What about digesters? create clean energy from animal waste which can cause issues with waterways, any investment? nope.

What about a scheme to encourage farmers to plant 20-30 broad leaf trees on their land and ensure that they are maintained? would be exceptionally easy as every farm will have a bit of boggy land in a corner, wire it off and plant alder (will grow in bad land). easy way to add a million or so broadleaf trees.

What about a grant that would cover 75% off the cost of installing solar panels on the roofs of national schools, almost every village has one. the community would raise the remaining 25% and the government would give a guarantee to buy the electricity back at a set price with this money going directly to the national school. Make money of those long summer holidays? nope

Jimmy_oc1998

AtomicHorror wrote: »

On the flip side, there's Poe's Law, so you can understand why sometimes people feel the need to ask that incredulous question.



Unless you have kids, or other people you care about in the world, or a conscience generally, or empathy, or have thought past the painfully obvious idea of "everything turns to **** in the end" even for a few minutes.

Seriously, you think you're privy to some special revelation with this fatalistic teenagers life philosophy?

But sure if you really cared about the planet you wouldn't be having kids anyways?

Dohnjoe

The Oort Cloud wrote: »

I think every-one agrees that climate change is real, as the climate has been naturally changing for millions of years and longer, Natural climate change is just that 'Natural', and we will no doubt have another ice-age in the future and also much warmer periods like the medieval warm period, and this is a natural cycle of our planet.



But these alarmist nutcases want to completely stop and interfere with the earths natural cycles, and they think that puny humans are going to cause something that already exists 'Climate Change'. Not one scientist or climatologist on this planet fully understands how the climate actually works, but yet they think they know the exact change variables humans are supposed to accumulate to it when they do not even fully understand climate.



So-called man-made global warming as it was originally called is the biggest money making scam in the history of the world. Tax the worlds population for something that always existed... Natural climate change.

"Believing in this fringe denialist theory makes me think I am smarter than the majority of climatologists and scientists and that's what makes me feel special"

The Oort Cloud

Dohnjoe wrote: »

"Believing in this fringe denialist theory makes me think I am smarter than the majority of climatologists and scientists and that's what makes me feel special"

The simple fact that I included above is correct. They do not fully understand climate also called chaos theory. I don't think you understood my point.

Hobosan

Jimmy_oc1998 wrote: »

But sure if you really cared about the planet you wouldn't be having kids anyways?

It doesn't mean you can't have kids. It just means you have to train your kids in the ancient Mongol tradition.

AtomicHorror

Jimmy_oc1998 wrote: »

But sure if you really cared about the planet you wouldn't be having kids anyways?

Neat deflection, but if you care about the planet you don't necessarily stop having kids. You ensure you don't have more kids than parents, and ideally you have fewer.

And the rest of the argument? People you care about aside from your kids, empathy for humans generally?

Still stuck on entropy, right? Nobody gets you, you see things clearer than the rest of us.

snowstreams

Jimmy_oc1998 wrote: »

But sure if you really cared about the planet you wouldn't be having kids anyways?

You would probably still have 1 or 2 kids to stabilize population for the future.

Grayson

mad muffin wrote: »

Here’s the deal…

Fûck off with your climate change. There is fück all I can do more than I’m already doing.

I recycle all I can. Yet companies keep selling shît in stuff I can’t even recycle, and my recycling is ending up in a land dump in some foreign country anyway.

I only own one car.

I own a modest home that needs minimal heating and no cooling.

I rarely fly in a plane.

I don’t spew forth toxins into the atmosphere or the waterways.

Any appliance I have I try to fix when it breaks down.

I don’t go chopping forests down.

What needs to happen for any meaningful change is for them to go bleating to the governments and the companies and the rich folk who own dozens of properties, cars, flys every second day in a jet.

There is fúck all else we can do it’s in their laps but they will do fúck all because they say it’s up to us.

Well then bend over and kiss your arse goodbye cause the planet is up to shît if we have to depend on them bunch of fücking arseholes.

Did you ever think that climate change wasn't about you personally?

AtomicHorror

snowstreams wrote: »

You would probably still have 1 or 2 kids to stabilize population for the future.

What future, maaan? Everything is essentially meaningless.

I read Sarte and it blew my miiiind.

Waiting to see if Jimmy pivots to sarcasm- probably his only play here.

Dohnjoe

The Oort Cloud wrote: »

The simple fact that I included above is correct. They do not fully understand climate also called chaos theory. I don't think you understood my point.

I dread to think what would have happened if denialist loons and the internet were around when we had the Ozone problem

Hobosan

AtomicHorror wrote: »

What future, maaan? Everything is essentially meaningless.

I read Sarte and it blew my miiiind.

Waiting to see if Jimmy pivots to sarcasm- probably his only play here.

Careful now, you might unwittingly prove his point!

wakka12

A bit of scare mongering wouldnt go even slightly astray in this greedy, selfish, ignorant, exploitative race of humans who destroy this once beautiful planet. Look at the photos of beaches worldwide covered in plastic? The amount of species that have already gone extinct,our cities streets choked by cars daily,the millions of animals killed daily for our meals,the millions of trees destroyed daily, the millions of plastic cups and bags used needlessly every day, a lot needs to change regardless of how ****ed the earth already is or not

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

I'll email him a link to this and see what he has to say.

moonage

AtomicHorror

The Oort Cloud wrote: »

The simple fact that I included above is correct. They do not fully understand climate also called chaos theory. I don't think you understood my point.

We get it. There's an unpredictable element, a margin of error... but no it's not that! It's chaos theory, so all is lost! Nothing is knowable! Throw up your hands and abandon all efforts to control the uncontrollable! Nobody understands this like I, the prophet of chaos, who read about it in New Scientist in 1996.

I don't know, where are you going with this? Where does citing chaos theory actually get anyone?

Well, it does invite pendants to point out that you stating "climate also called chaos theory" is wildly inaccurate. Climate is a chaotic system, but not the only one. Also climate being chaotic does not mean it cannot be modeled, because modelling chaos is the point of chaos theory.

Do you work in the area by any chance?

DEFTLEFTHAND

The 18 predictions from Earth Day 1970 in the 'comments section' of the link is pretty weird in fairness.

How did they get everything so spectacularly wrong?

Dohnjoe

AtomicHorror wrote: »

We get it. There's an unpredictable element, a margin of error... but no it's not that! It's chaos theory, so all is lost! Nothing is knowable! Throw up your hands and abandon all efforts to control the uncontrollable! Nobody understands this like I, the prophet of chaos, who read about it in New Scientist in 1996.

I don't know, where are you going with this? Where does citing chaos theory actually get anyone?

Well, it does invite pendants to point out that you stating "climate also called chaos theory" is wildly inaccurate. Climate is a chaotic system, but not the only one. Also climate being chaotic does not mean it cannot be modeled, because modelling chaos is the point of chaos theory.

Do you work in the area by any chance?

There were a few these types in the recent climate change thread - apparently all the climate change scientists met up in a hollowed out volcano and came up with a dastardly plan to convince the world there was man-made climate change and so ensure their continued employment or something..

They are up there with the anti-vax crowd

kneemos

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

The 18 predictions from Earth Day 1970 in the 'comments section' of the link is pretty weird in fairness.

How did they get everything so spectacularly wrong?

They seem compelled to be histrionic for some reason.

https://fee.org/articles/18-spectacularly-wrong-predictions-made-around-the-time-of-the-first-earth-day-in-1970-expect-more-this-year/

Hobosan

Dohnjoe wrote: »

There were a few these types in the recent climate change thread - apparently all the climate change scientists met up in a hollowed out volcano and came up with a dastardly plan to convince the world there was man-made climate change and so ensure their continued employment or something..

They are up there with the anti-vax crowd

Studies suggest skeptics are more environmentally friendly than true believers...

weldoninhio

Patty Hearst wrote: »

Whats strange about Attenborough is that he spent a good 2 decades proclaiming population increase as the greatest threat to the environment and humanity. So did just about every other environmentalist of note.

They seem to have dropped that concern now. why is that?

More money in the carbon taxes etc.

ollkiller

Originally Posted by ollkiller
"Here's the thing. If climate change is real or not it's still good practice to not cut down rain forests, pollute our planet with plastic waste and overfish our seas."

Jimmy_oc1998 wrote: »

Obvious rebuttal to that is everyone is campaigning for more taxes so essentially you'd be making your life harder for no reason.

How is that a rebuttal. I'm not campaigning for taxes. All i'm saying is stop cutting down trees and clean up after yourself.

Dohnjoe

Hobosan wrote: »

Studies suggest skeptics are more environmentally friendly than true believers...

Studies suggest psychologically people will deny science/historians just to appear smarter than those pesky knowledge type people and their zany theories and "facts"

Grayson

kneemos wrote: »

They seem compelled to be histrionic for some reason.

https://fee.org/articles/18-spectacularly-wrong-predictions-made-around-the-time-of-the-first-earth-day-in-1970-expect-more-this-year/

To be fair when reading those predictions, we made changes to stop some. There's one about air pollution for example. We made changes to get rid of the worst of it by making sure there was smokeless fuels etc. However air pollution is still bad enough that many die from it and there are places where authorities have told people not to go outside unless they have to.

The site does make one big mistake though. It's taken a number of predictions made by a number of people and conflated them with consensus amongst scientists.

Zorya

Jimmy_oc1998 wrote: »

Ah sure **** it. It's going to end one day anyways. Once you come to realise that even if we ate grass and shat in the back garden there will come a time when the last human on earth dies, it all becomes less alarming.

There's some great jokers in this thread, I like that , I've laughed out loud several times in the few pages I've read. I'd rather die laughing than being preached at incessantly to rinse my Marmite jars.

And before anyone thinks I don't, I do wash my jars and recycle everything ...and I have spent more than 2 decades in the past living with no electricity and only an outdoor compost toilet. So my carbon balance is fairly low over a lifetime.
But we the irrelevant serfs are not the ones that need to change our ways. Big industry just pays to pollute. The polluter pays, remember. That used to be the chant, the prayer, the motto. And boy do they pay and pollute. They get their moneys worth. The big fnuking multinationals ruining the west and midlands with coniferous plantations masquerading as their virtuous carbon sinks can go shyte for themselves if they think I am going into buy their religion.

Hobosan

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Studies suggest psychologically people will deny science/historians just to appear smarter than those pesky knowledge type people and their zany theories and "facts"

I haven't come across those studies, but I have seen those types in action. Tremendous fun.

Either way, it would be hilarious if more evidence mounts that the dunces had the right idea all along, despite denying the reality of the situation.

uptherebels

The Oort Cloud wrote: »

I think every-one agrees that climate change is real, as the climate has been naturally changing for millions of years and longer, Natural climate change is just that 'Natural', and we will no doubt have another ice-age in the future and also much warmer periods like the medieval warm period, and this is a natural cycle of our planet.



But these alarmist nutcases want to completely stop and interfere with the earths natural cycles, and they think that puny humans are going to cause something that already exists 'Climate Change'. Not one scientist or climatologist on this planet fully understands how the climate actually works, but yet they think they know the exact change variables humans are supposed to accumulate to it when they do not even fully understand climate.



So-called man-made global warming as it was originally called is the biggest money making scam in the history of the world. Tax the worlds population for something that always existed... Natural climate change.

WOW. No too many want to stop or interfere with the earths natural cycles. They want to stop and/or limit man made influences that accelerate the change in the natural cycle. As with many things in life its not the change that is the problem, it is the rate at which the change happens.
Your correct that not one scientist or climatologist fully understands the climate . This is because it is a very large and complex system.So like most other fields of science, where no one person understands everything, it works on the contribution of the many.

Harry Palmr

I'd have thought pumping billions of tonnes of carbon into the seas and air would be more likely to interfere with the "natural" cyles myself.

Plumbthedepths

weldoninhio wrote:

More money in the carbon taxes etc.

When the world is truly f**ked and beyond the point of no return, what value do you think money will have?

Gimme A Pound

Kneemos, what is the "climate change agenda"?

Pauliedragon

I was only thinking today I remember being in primary school (mid 80's) there was all this talk of "acid rain". Whatever happened to that?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

kneemos wrote: »

Not a clue. Nature programmes however inevitably have a forlorn looking Seal or Polar Bear to drive home the climate change agenda.

Other environmental disasters like to the destruction of forests for example rarely get a mention.

Rarely get a mention? That was all people could talk about in the ‘90s and it’s still recognised as a very bad thing.

mcmoustache

Pauliedragon wrote: »

I was only thinking today I remember being in primary school (mid 80's) there was all this talk of "acid rain". Whatever happened to that?

Like with the Ozone Layer, governments took action and restricted what you could pump into the atmosphere and mostly solved the problem here in Europe. It didn't magically go away nor was it made up. Other less developed countries still have acid rain problems.

James Brown

Edgar Dead Neighbor wrote: »

Kneemos, what is the "climate change agenda"?

It's like the "homeless industry" or "Egg conspiracy" if you don't like eggs.

mcmoustache

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Rarely get a mention? That was all people could talk about in the ‘90s and it’s still recognised as a very bad thing.

When people say things like "x rarely gets a mention", what they mean is that they haven't been hearing about it in their particular bubble and project that onto the whole population.

kneemos

Edgar Dead Neighbor wrote: »

Kneemos, what is the "climate change agenda"?

I was referring to nature programmes always blaming everything on climate change,even when there is evidence to the contrary.

No problem with climate change, it's the hysteria,exaggeration and lies that do the cause no good.