Attenborough scaremongering?

mcmoustache

Charles Ingles wrote: »

http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2013/06/03/3773350.htm
I remember it well same scare mongering

Clearly not. Have you even read that link or do you have some comprehension problem? It's hard to tell.

The linked article just says that the theory of CFCs causing global warming by Lu is a fringe theory bordering on nonsense.

CFCs were what caused the Ozone layer shrinkage, then we stopped potting CFCs in the air and then the shrinkage stopped. It's like the way water stops coming out of the tap when you turn it off. It's all fairly simple for most people to grasp.

A theory that suggests banned aerosol gases are to blame for global warming, not carbon dioxide, has been questioned by climate scientists.

In a paper published in the journal of Modern Physics B , Professor Qin-Bin Lu, a professor of physics and astronomy, biology and chemistry at the University of Waterloo challenges conventional thinking about the roots of climate change.

"Conventional thinking says that the emission of human-made non-CFC gases such as carbon dioxide has mainly contributed to global warming.

Charles Ingles

Dakota Dan wrote: »

Let’s just shoot the alarmists and there followers, kill two birds with the one stone. No more constant doom and gloom.

All these celebrities crying on about climate change then fly around the world in private jets.
I remember Leonardo DiCaprio flew 8000 miles in a private jets to collect s green award for environmental work.

mcmoustache

galwayllm wrote: »

The whole "climate change" thing is scaremongering in general!

It's all fake news...

Wow. What a well-informed and original opinion.

Charles Ingles

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

It's Latin.

Latin for what?

Plumbthedepths

Charles Ingles wrote:

Latin for what?

You seem keen on research, should be easy for you.

Dakota Dan

Charles Ingles wrote: »

All these celebrities crying on about climate change then fly around the world in private jets.
I remember Leonardo DiCaprio flew 8000 miles in a private jets to collect s green award for environmental work.

And then they will tell you he offset his pollution with carbon credits, amazing how money fixes a problem.

super_furry

galwayllm wrote: »

The whole "climate change" thing is scaremongering in general!

It's all fake news...

Well on the one hand there's the entire international scientific community who are pretty much in agreement on man-made climate change and the dangers it poses, but then there's galwayllm on boards.ie.

So in conclusion Ireland is a land of contrasts.

Charles Ingles

Dakota Dan wrote: »

And then they will tell you he offset his pollution with carbon credits, amazing how money fixes a problem.

Carbon taxes will fix everything

Dohnjoe

Charles Ingles wrote: »

Carbon taxes will fix everything

Do you have a better idea?

kneemos

super_furry wrote: »

Well on the one hand there's the entire international scientific community who are pretty much in agreement on man-made climate change and the dangers it poses, but then there's galwayllm on boards.ie.

So in conclusion Ireland is a land of contrasts.

It's not the entire scientific community. This the kind of hyperbole that constantly gets stick on to climate change.

Wouldn't be in disagreement with it, probably not as bad as they say judging from previous statements,but at least keep it honest.

Irexit

kneemos wrote: »

It's not the entire scientific community. This the kind of hyperbole that constantly gets stick on to climate change.

Wouldn't be in disagreement with it, probably not as bad as they say judging from previous statements,but at least keep it honest.

And most of the scientists who believe in this climate change nonsense have a vested interest in it they are not impartial.

Dohnjoe

kneemos wrote: »

It's not the entire scientific community. This the kind of hyperbole that constantly gets stick on to climate change.

Wouldn't be in disagreement with it, probably not as bad as they say judging from previous statements,but at least keep it honest.

Semantics really, it's an overwhelming consensus.

Some people genuinely believe that because "debate" exists on a subject, that means something 50/50 is going on. Constant debate exists in almost everything, take for example Holocaust figures, constant debate, but the consensus figures are widely taken as historical fact

Charles Ingles

Irexit wrote: »

And most of the scientists who believe in this climate change nonsense have a vested interest in it they are not impartial.

The scientists who who dare to say anything against the cult of climate change are lambasted

Plumbthedepths

Charles Ingles wrote:

The scientists who who dare to say anything against the cult of climate change are lambasted

Who are these scientists and have they published their own research to counter the accepted position ?

Faugheen

Irexit wrote: »

And most of the scientists who believe in this climate change nonsense have a vested interest in it they are not impartial.

At least they have facts and research to back up what they're saying.

Unlike the likes of you who just screams 'it's all nonsense' and your proof is God and conspiracy theories.

Tell me why climate change is nonsense, if you're able to.

I don't want a link dump from the opinions of Gemma O'Doherty or any other crackpot crank. I want cold, hard evidence to back up your ****e.

Yurt2

Charles Ingles wrote: »

The scientists who who dare to say anything against the cult of climate change are lambasted

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_who_disagree_with_the_scientific_consensus_on_global_warming


Probably not an exhaustive list - but I clicked on a few names at random; two were in receipt of funding from fossil fuel companies / fossil fuel related research orgs. One is a German politician / scientist who also happened to be an energy company executive.


Not ars*d going through all their bone fides, but I'd say there's a lot of money on the line for scientists who are tempted to break with the consensus.

Harry Palmr

Irexit wrote: »

And most of the scientists who believe in this climate change nonsense have a vested interest in it they are not impartial.

How fantastic someone named Irexit has said this. It's as if you adhere to a stereotype What are your thoughts on vaccination against common diseases? or whether the Earth is a sphere?

Irexit

Faugheen wrote: »

At least they have facts and research to back up what they're saying.

Unlike the likes of you who just screams 'it's all nonsense' and your proof is God and conspiracy theories.

Tell me why climate change is nonsense, if you're able to.

I don't want a link dump from the opinions of Gemma O'Doherty or any other crackpot crank. I want cold, hard evidence to back up your ****e.

Prof Ray Bates a senior Meteorologist from Met Eireann has said there is 'no scientific evidence' that we are in a 'planetary emergency'. Someone like Prof Ray Bates knows what hes talking about but all people can do who oppose him is call him a 'climate change denier' instead of trying to debate him. https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/irish-scientist-questions-warnings-on-climate-change-1.3738727

galwayllm

mcmoustache wrote: »

Wow. What a well-informed and original opinion.

Wow, what a well informeded and original reply!

Gawd c'mon do people just copy and paste anymore....

You're boring....

Faugheen

Irexit wrote: »

Prof Ray Bates a senior Meteorologist from Met Eireann has said there is 'no scientific evidence' that we are in a 'planetary emergency'. Someone like Prof Ray Bates knows what hes talking about but all people can do who oppose him is call him a 'climate change denier' instead of trying to debate him. https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/irish-scientist-questions-warnings-on-climate-change-1.3738727

Where's his evidence?

I asked you for cold, hard evidence and you've given me a link of someone saying it's not as bad as being made out - with no evidence.

So I'll ask you again, give me proof that it's all false, not someone saying so.

Before you suggest that I'm moving the goalposts, for every Ray Bates, I can give you someone who says Ray Bates is chatting ****e, and we don't actually get anywhere.

Harry Palmr

Irexit wrote: »

Prof Ray Bates a senior Meteorologist from Met Eireann has said there is 'no scientific evidence' that we are in a 'planetary emergency'. Someone like Prof Ray Bates knows what hes talking about but all people can do who oppose him is call him a 'climate change denier' instead of trying to debate him. https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/irish-scientist-questions-warnings-on-climate-change-1.3738727

Is a retired UCD lecturer. Does not work for Met Eireann he is part of Irish Climate Science Forum a cunningly named lobby group against changing the status quo.

Its members are characterized by an open and enquiring mind on climate science, driven by the imperative of objectivity without any vested interests.

In other words "don't dare challenge us as being closed minded".

Plumbthedepths

Irexit wrote:

Prof Ray Bates a senior Meteorologist from Met Eireann has said there is 'no scientific evidence' that we are in a 'planetary emergency'. Someone like Prof Ray Bates knows what hes talking about but all people can do who oppose him is call him a 'climate change denier' instead of trying to debate him.

That's not quite what he said. Try reading the article you linked.

kneemos

Faugheen wrote: »

Where's his evidence?

I asked you for cold, hard evidence and you've given me a link of someone saying it's not as bad as being made out - with no evidence.

So I'll ask you again, give me proof that it's all false, not someone saying so.

Before you suggest that I'm moving the goalposts, for every Ray Bates, I can give you someone who says Ray Bates is chatting ****e, and we don't actually get anywhere.

It's all guesswork at best,educated guesswork, but best guess.

Previous evidence based guesses have proven well wide of the target.

kowloon

Charles Ingles wrote: »

Carbon taxes will fix everything

And this is the real problem I think people have with climate change, it might cost them money.

Grayson

Irexit wrote: »

And most of the scientists who believe in this climate change nonsense have a vested interest in it they are not impartial.

That's why we seem them driving around in ferraris.

On one side there's a vast , overwhelming number of academics with a millennia of experience between them. On the other hand we have big oil and coal companies who's execs do actually make millions and drive expensive cars.

Only the delusional could think that climate scientists are in it for the money.

Edit: Just saw he's banned. I'm sure they'll rereg and be back any minute now.

Yurt2

Professor Bates has - in the past at least - accepted that climate change is being driven in part by anthropogenic factors (emissions) as well as natural fluctuations.

There's an element of "pulling on the green jersey" in what he says. I suspect he is muddying the water somewhat for political and economic reasons given that the EU is likely to press us hard on agricultural emissions. He might not accept (for whatever reason) that we are in an 'emergency,' but he does accept that we are influencing global temperatures upwards through our behaviors.

Simply put, I don't believe he is a climate change denier, but he's sailing against the wind on the consensus on the harmful effects it will have, as he has stated for 'national interest' reasons.

Bobblehats

I’m a fishmonger. I wreak havoc upon those with a fear of fish

Galwayguy35

We need to stop breeding, there's too many humans and we're contributing to the extinction of other species that have been around long before we were.

feargale

An accountant rubbishing climate change?
I'd rather hear David Attenborough rubbishing accountancy.
Or, better still, a brothel owner rubbishing chastity.

Ah yes, Attenborough, unlike the climate change deniers, has ulterior motives, you know. He has been bribed with promises of a life of luxury stretching out before him, of untold riches, including his own oil well and a bevy of women (he's 90.) Philip Morris the fag flogger never stooped to the tricks that the environmentalists get up to. Neither would the oil companies. After all, see the vision they showed a century ago when steam-powered automobiles were on the rise. They put them out of business.
No, no. All this stuff about climate change is a myth, and who better to show it up than conservative women, who give a big sh*t about the future of us slobs and our grandchildren, and who speak of little else when lying out on their superyachts in the Med. :rolleyes:

You believe me, don't you?

StinkyMunkey

kneemos wrote: »

https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/climate-change-the-fake-news-from-attenborough/


It's obvious all of these programmes pick stories that suit their agenda.
Attenborough in particular carries a lot weight in what he says,maybe a bit if balance wouldn't go astray.
Don't know if all the facts and figures in the article are accurate,but it certainly makes some good points.

Silly David, what would he know with his decades of experience.

Unfortuantely for us, your ilk are the reason my grand children will not enjoy the natural world quiet as it is today.

Humans for all their ingenuity are going to be victims of their own cleverness/greed.

Grayson

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

We need to stop breeding, there's too many humans and we're contributing to the extinction of other species that have been around long before we were.

The richest 10% of humans are responsible for 90% of the emissions. The vast majority of people on this planet are living within their carbon allowance.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/02/worlds-richest-10-produce-half-of-global-carbon-emissions-says-oxfam

Plus 100 companies are responsible for 71% of global emissions.
https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10/100-fossil-fuel-companies-investors-responsible-71-global-emissions-cdp-study-climate-change

Galwayguy35

Grayson wrote: »

The richest 10% of humans are responsible for 90% of the emissions. The vast majority of people on this planet are living within their carbon allowance.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/02/worlds-richest-10-produce-half-of-global-carbon-emissions-says-oxfam

Plus 100 companies are responsible for 71% of global emissions.
https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10/100-fossil-fuel-companies-investors-responsible-71-global-emissions-cdp-study-climate-change

But the population growth at the moment is unsustainable, I'm glad I won't be around to see how it will end up.

Dakota Dan

Faugheen wrote: »

Where's his evidence?

I asked you for cold, hard evidence and you've given me a link of someone saying it's not as bad as being made out - with no evidence.

So I'll ask you again, give me proof that it's all false, not someone saying so.

Before you suggest that I'm moving the goalposts, for every Ray Bates, I can give you someone who says Ray Bates is chatting ****e, and we don't actually get anywhere.

Do you not agree that the media and news outlets completely over exaggerate it?

Dakota Dan

kowloon wrote: »

And this is the real problem I think people have with climate change, it might cost them money.

Yep being taxed for using fossil fuels when there is no real alternative to completely replace them.

Dakota Dan

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

Silly David, what would he know with his decades of experience.

Unfortuantely for us, your ilk are the reason my grand children will not enjoy the natural world quiet as it is today.

Humans for all their ingenuity are going to be victims of their own cleverness/greed.

He did a two year science degree hardly decades of experience and it isn’t that long that he jumped on the climate change bandwagon prompted by the bbc

Dohnjoe

Dakota Dan wrote: »

He did a two year science degree hardly decades of experience and it isn’t that long that he jumped on the climate change bandwagon prompted by the bbc

15 years ago

https://www.carbonbrief.org/the-2004-lecture-that-finally-convinced-david-attenborough-about-global-warming

Patty Hearst

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

We need to stop breeding, there's too many humans and we're contributing to the extinction of other species that have been around long before we were.

True, but Europeans are doing quite well on that front. In fact European birth rates are plummeting.

So you'll have to tell the Africans to stop breeding but that might be a bit racist.

And why is it that the very same people who tell us to stop breeding are also telling us that we need to import millions from the third world to bolster our falling birth rates.

Something doesn't quite add up there does it?

StinkyMunkey

Dakota Dan wrote: »

He did a two year science degree hardly decades of experience and it isn’t that long that he jumped on the climate change bandwagon prompted by the bbc

Sometimes I wonder are some people just simple or actually believe the tripe they type.

Now ask yourself what has David decades of experience doing, or are the dots to hard to connect!?

Patty Hearst

Dakota Dan wrote: »

He did a two year science degree hardly decades of experience and it isn’t that long that he jumped on the climate change bandwagon prompted by the bbc

I love Attenborough to bits, but you're right its only relatively recently that he joined the climate change brigade..previous to this he was (rightly) all about overpopulation, consumption, pollution and the destruction of natural habitat.

Bobblehats

Scaring is caring?

Dakota Dan

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

Sometimes I wonder are some people just simple or actually believe the tripe they type.

Now ask yourself what has David decades of experience doing, or are the dots to hard to connect!?

Talking ****e, Just because he hosts nature programs doesn’t make him an expert.

Dohnjoe

Dakota Dan wrote: »

Talking ****e, Just because he hosts nature programs doesn’t make him an expert.

He's one of the most trusted figures in Britain, and knows it, so he doesn't bandy around opinions lightly. Also you don't have to be a climatologist to have a valid opinion on the consensus of climatologists.

Dohnjoe

Patty Hearst wrote: »

I love Attenborough to bits, but you're right its only relatively recently that he joined the climate change brigade..previous to this he was (rightly) all about overpopulation, consumption, pollution and the destruction of natural habitat.

And again, Attenborough has been against man-made climate-change for 15 years

StinkyMunkey

Dakota Dan wrote: »

Talking ****e, Just because he hosts nature programs doesn’t make him an expert.

Makes him 1000x more informed than you, or are you an expert?

Dakota Dan

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

Makes him 1000x more informed than you, or are you an expert?

His latest news flash is echoing the children’s climate strikes and saying that his generation wrecked the planet for today’s children. While David was born during the 1920’s with a silver spoon in his mouth the majority if people were living on poverty for many decades after he was born. If you can’t see that he is just pushing an agenda you must be deluded.

Yurt2

Dakota Dan wrote: »

His latest news flash is echoing the children’s climate strikes and saying that his generation wrecked the planet for today’s children. While David was born during the 1920’s with a silver spoon in his mouth the majority if people were living on poverty for many decades after he was born. If you can’t see that he is just pushing an agenda you must be deluded.

What does his family's social standing have to do with the issue of climate change? And why does it preclude him from speaking on something he (and most other scientists) believes to be grounded in fact?



I may as well say you own a pair of blue trousers - you're obviously peddling an agenda.

Yurt2

Both Jimmy Garlic and Dakota Dan's names begin with consonants; and as we all know, people with names beginning with consonants have a very particular agenda when it comes to climate change science.

Yurt2

OK

So far here's what I have deduced from a couple of threads worth of posts from 'climate change skeptics' (I'm being charitable calling ye that):

In order for your opinion on man-made climate change to be admissible one must not be:

- middle class
- upper class
- unemployed
- from a developed country
- from China
- in tertiary education
- uneducated
- a hippy
- a vegetarian
- a meat eater
- in possession of an unusual haircut
- young
- old
- from a conventional scientific background
- a member of a left leaning organization
- in possession of a smartphone
- in the media profession
- someone who has used different modes of transports

Dohnjoe

Dakota Dan wrote: »

His latest news flash is echoing the children’s climate strikes and saying that his generation wrecked the planet for today’s children. While David was born during the 1920’s with a silver spoon in his mouth the majority if people were living on poverty for many decades after he was born. If you can’t see that he is just pushing an agenda you must be deluded.

We are merely sheeple here, what's the nefarious agenda?

gozunda

Not the first or last time Attenborough courted controversy. In his last great crusade his main thesis was that overpopulation was killing the earth and this required drastic measures in those areas with highest population growth. He appears to have largely dropped that tagline for a new one involving doomsday scenarios of climate change.

As the "most trusted man in Britain' (sic) Tbh his business is creating dramatic documentaries. Something he apparently does quite well

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/sorry-sir-david-attenborough-this-isn-t-the-way-to-tackle-over-population-8824385.html

He has also been accused of (bizarrely) of a belonging to era of "white men on TV explaining things" who are now redundant. Interestingly this insult is bandied about by some and on boards to attack others with phrases such as "classic gammon" etc as in the term "bacon / gammon" where he is representative of a generation of older white men pontificating to others. Ironically some throwing that idea around at others now appear to actively support Attenbourogh ... :rolleyes:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/f05add7a-56df-11e8-9ed6-2a2b8ba208a7

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1027371/David-Attenborough-BBC-Blue-Planet-Newsnight