Why the sudden hysteria over climate change?

Shai

SirGerryAdams wrote: »

<snip for brevity>

This is a fair criticism. It is an unfortunate side-effect of the way how scientific work is actually done, and how it ends up getting picked up by the PR people who think they're oh so good as messaging.

Your above points, as well as an earlier point about 12 years being a bit of an arbitrary number, are actually echoed by the lead scientist of the reports about us having exactly 12 years (http://theconversation.com/why-protesters-should-be-wary-of-12-years-to-climate-breakdown-rhetoric-115489). You can see the actual predictions of the report on page 12 of https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/2/2018/07/SR15_SPM_version_stand_alone_LR.pdf, as well as their uncertainty estimates.

Shai

jackboy wrote: »

Again, in the link you have posted, there are no immediate drastic actions proposed to reverse human caused climate change in the next 12 years. It just includes medium to long actions which will be way too little too late to meet the 12 year deadline. If the 12 year thing is true then it is too late for wind farms, solar technology and even population controls.

I must be reading a different article than you are. I'm pretty sure that work on promoting energy-efficient transportation, energy efficient buildings (and upgrading old ones), an increase in renewable energy investments, preparing for the sea level to rise, regulations against overfishing could be started tomorrow.

Jimmy Garlic

20Cent wrote: »

What agenda?

Scientists around the world faking data is a massive conspiracy, this is huge if true.

The political agenda came before any science.Very likely to not do anything that will jeopardise their funding. Blacklisted if they don't sing from the hymn sheet.

Ulysses Gaze

Paying carbon taxes in Ireland is going to mean the sum of sweet **** all if India, China, Brazil and the US are still pumping out pollution the way they are.

Shai

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

The political agenda came before any science.Very likely to not do anything that will jeopardise their funding. Blacklisted if they don't sing from the hymn sheet.

I see you have missed my earlier post on this.

alright, it's a valid concern. Luckily, independent research on this has been sponsored in the past (https://www.businessinsider.com/koch...p=1&r=US&IR=T). The research was done by a scientist who was climate change skeptic (not a denier, an actual skeptic). He ended up concluding that the predicted climate change would actually be worse

Or perhaps the climate change cabal got to him *ominous music plays*

Ulysses Gaze

Shai wrote: »

I see you have missed my earlier post on this.



Or perhaps the climate change cabal got to him *ominous music plays*

It was Soros. Had to be. He seems to be Keyser Soze of ALL nefarious doings in the world at the moment.

jackboy

Shai wrote: »

I must be reading a different article than you are. I'm pretty sure that work on promoting energy-efficient transportation, energy efficient buildings (and upgrading old ones), an increase in renewable energy investments, preparing for the sea level to rise, regulations against overfishing could be started tomorrow.

None of those are drastic actions which will reverse human caused climate change in the next 12 years. They are minor actions which will gradually improve things over the coming decades.

Jimmy Garlic

jackboy wrote: »

None of those are drastic actions which will reverse human caused climate change in the next 12 years. They are minor actions which will gradually improve things over the coming decades.

What about the sun. Nothing to do with the climate changing? All human caused is it?

Shai

jackboy wrote: »

None of those are drastic actions which will reverse human caused climate change in the next 12 years. They are minor actions which will gradually improve things over the coming decades.

we could literally ban cars from all major city centers tomorrow as part of the above. Or start a 10 year plan to be at a 100% green energy in 10 years. Perhaps we have a different idea of what drastic means.

Shai

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

What about the sun. Nothing to do with the climate changing? All human caused is it?

Are you somehow laboring under the delusion that no research into this has been done?

https://phys.org/news/2013-12-solar-key-climate.html
https://phys.org/news/2017-03-sun-impact-climate-quantified.html

Although I'm sure you'll tell me George Soros must have gotten to them as well.

gr8 m8

Hello.

All these plans that come from the government are at the end of the day a money racket because that is what they do! They come up with new ways to make money from the population on a regular basis.

But why do we need them to spur us into action? Banning cars and whatever else they can think of is great I suppose but why not start small at home?

Buy a travel mug and water bottle and leave it in your car, fill up the travel mug with coffee at your favorite coffee shop and you don't use their paper cups. Get an insulated water bottle and fill it up at the water cooler in the office and you don't have to use the small plastic bottles from the shop every day.

Plant a fruit tree in your garden to catch some carbon and you might get some apples off it or compost your left over food like lettuce leaves and potato skins in a bucket in the garage so it doesn't go to the land fill.

Small steps can add up and while it may not be the solution at least it's not part of the problem! Put a solar panel on your roof if you can afford it and then you have some hot water for a shower without turning on the boiler and adding to your electrical bill.

At the end of the day, if you believe in climate change or not, it doesn't really matter but one less paper cup or plastic bottle going to the dump, one smaller bag of food waste in the bin or a half hour without using electricity can't really be a bad thing, can it? You might even save a few euros for yourself and the kids can grab an apple off the tree in the morning on the way to school. How bad?

bfa1509

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

Paying carbon taxes in Ireland is going to mean the sum of sweet **** all if India, China, Brazil and the US are still pumping out pollution the way they are.

Don't forget the volcanoes and natural forest fires, of which humans have no control over.

gr8 m8 wrote: »

Hello.

All these plans that come from the government are at the end of the day a money racket because that is what they do! They come up with new ways to make money from the population on a regular basis.

But why do we need them to spur us into action? Banning cars and whatever else they can think of is great I suppose but why not start small at home?

Buy a travel mug and water bottle and leave it in your car, fill up the travel mug with coffee at your favorite coffee shop and you don't use their paper cups. Get an insulated water bottle and fill it up at the water cooler in the office and you don't have to use the small plastic bottles from the shop every day.

Plant a fruit tree in your garden to catch some carbon and you might get some apples off it or compost your left over food like lettuce leaves and potato skins in a bucket in the garage so it doesn't go to the land fill.

Small steps can add up and while it may not be the solution at least it's not part of the problem! Put a solar panel on your roof if you can afford it and then you have some hot water for a shower without turning on the boiler and adding to your electrical bill.

At the end of the day, if you believe in climate change or not, it doesn't really matter but one less paper cup or plastic bottle going to the dump, one smaller bag of food waste in the bin or a half hour without using electricity can't really be a bad thing, can it? You might even save a few euros for yourself and the kids can grab an apple off the tree in the morning on the way to school. How bad?

This is where I have a problem with the whole climate change thing, where the line is blurred between "climate action" and personal gripes that people have with others. The majority of people don't care about doing anything substantial themselves, they just want to moan about other people's lifestyles and pretend that these small changes will make the blindest bit of difference.

gr8 m8

Hello,

So you are saying that nothing should be done unless it completely solves the problem in one fantastic swoop?

I'm not saying that anyone has to do anything and I have no interest in doing anything just so I can feel better than anyone.

I'm just carrying a metal water bottle around with me that cost about a tenner. That's all! And it does make a tiny tiny different that probably doesn't matter, but who cares!

jackboy

Shai wrote: »

we could literally ban cars from all major city centers tomorrow as part of the above. Or start a 10 year plan to be at a 100% green energy in 10 years. Perhaps we have a different idea of what drastic means.

No such actions are being proposed by governments or scientists. Or maybe you and most other people do not really believe the 12 year thing. Maybe most scientists also don’t really believe in the 12 year thing. It’s almost like some people who go to mass every Sunday and then act as if there is no god as soon as they walk out the church door.

SirGerryAdams

gr8 m8 wrote: »

Hello.

All these plans that come from the government are at the end of the day a money racket because that is what they do! They come up with new ways to make money from the population on a regular basis.

But why do we need them to spur us into action? Banning cars and whatever else they can think of is great I suppose but why not start small at home?

Buy a travel mug and water bottle and leave it in your car, fill up the travel mug with coffee at your favorite coffee shop and you don't use their paper cups. Get an insulated water bottle and fill it up at the water cooler in the office and you don't have to use the small plastic bottles from the shop every day.

Plant a fruit tree in your garden to catch some carbon and you might get some apples off it or compost your left over food like lettuce leaves and potato skins in a bucket in the garage so it doesn't go to the land fill.

Small steps can add up and while it may not be the solution at least it's not part of the problem! Put a solar panel on your roof if you can afford it and then you have some hot water for a shower without turning on the boiler and adding to your electrical bill.

At the end of the day, if you believe in climate change or not, it doesn't really matter but one less paper cup or plastic bottle going to the dump, one smaller bag of food waste in the bin or a half hour without using electricity can't really be a bad thing, can it? You might even save a few euros for yourself and the kids can grab an apple off the tree in the morning on the way to school. How bad?

Bill Gates has said stopping emitting carbon is not good enough, we need to find a way of reversing the damage we do, nevermind stopping emitting what we do.

As well intentioned as it is, doing things like you suggest is only an act to make ones self feel important. They are pointless.

But anyways, I'm not saying don't do that, if you want to do that fine. I have a problem when people are taxing things and taking more money from my already empty pockets. Extra tax on diesel and electricity will not make me use less of them. It won't make me buy an electric car. It will just make me poorer.

Say my name

SirGerryAdams wrote: »

Bill Gates has said stopping emitting carbon is not good enough, we need to find a way of reversing the damage we do, nevermind stopping emitting what we do.

As well intentioned as it is, doing things like you suggest is only an act to make ones self feel important. They are pointless.

"Ice on Fire"

https://www.joe.ie/movies-tv/watch-leo-dicaprios-new-global-warming-documentary-actually-gives-us-hope-670439

blinding

Phil.x wrote: »

Ireland the saviour of the world.........not.

Unless political corruption can save the world .

blinding

I think the Eu Elections show why we have had the Climate Change / Green Saturation for the last while .

The Eu Philes knew the Eu was going to get one hell of a Kicking in these Elections so they Promoted their very own Safety Valve . Pump up the Greens as that Safety Valve and let the people believe they are making a difference and then hijack a few of the Greens Ideas (especially the ones that can be used to raise tax )

I mean who doesn’t want to save the Planet ( and Virtue Signal while you are at it ) .

Eu-philes will steal a few policies and then after the “ Heat “ is off continue on their Merry Way .

donaghs

Why does no-one talk about population growth any more?

Political correctness? i.e. where the growth is occuring.

Population growth issues have basically been resolved in the developed western world. Countries with low immigration like Russia and Japan actually have declining populations.

Yet, since the 1980s we been adding close to a billion people to world population every 10 years: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_growth
surely this is not sustainable and will drive both climate change other environmental damage.

With a few exceptions, population growth seems to be currently out of control in most African countries:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_growth_rate

stefanovich

donaghs wrote: »

Why does no-one talk about population growth any more?

Political correctness? i.e. where the growth is occuring.

Population growth issues have basically been resolved in the developed western world. Countries with low immigration like Russia and Japan actually have declining populations.

Yet, since the 1980s we been adding close to a billion people to world population every 10 years: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_growth
surely this is not sustainable and will drive both climate change other environmental damage.

With a few exceptions, population growth seems to be currently out of control in most African countries:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_growth_rate

It's so weird that focus has now shifted to the problem of population decline in the West. The only solution to which seems to be the importation of foreign populations.

It's almost as if this population hysteria was used as a political vehicle!

SirGerryAdams

donaghs wrote: »

Why does no-one talk about population growth any more?

Political correctness? i.e. where the growth is occuring.

Population growth issues have basically been resolved in the developed western world. Countries with low immigration like Russia and Japan actually have declining populations.

Yet, since the 1980s we been adding close to a billion people to world population every 10 years: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_growth
surely this is not sustainable and will drive both climate change other environmental damage.

With a few exceptions, population growth seems to be currently out of control in most African countries:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_growth_rate

People will just tell you that the population problem sorts itself out when it's developed like Europe. But they also fail to realise to develop like us means massive usage of resources and industrialisation, creating massive emissions.

I'm just after remembering the whole migrant crisis is gone and forgotten now, overtaken by the climate crisis. I wonder what crisis will be next?

xckjoo

donaghs wrote: »

Why does no-one talk about population growth any more?

Political correctness? i.e. where the growth is occuring.

Population growth issues have basically been resolved in the developed western world. Countries with low immigration like Russia and Japan actually have declining populations.

Yet, since the 1980s we been adding close to a billion people to world population every 10 years: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_growth
surely this is not sustainable and will drive both climate change other environmental damage.

With a few exceptions, population growth seems to be currently out of control in most African countries:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_growth_rate

I think there's two main reasons. Don't have the sources to hand but they should be available with a bit of googling. Someone else might post them if they have them to hand.

1) Population growth is declining everywhere and is expected to stabilise in the near-to-mid future.

2) The countries that still have high population growth are generally the least industrialised and so have the lowest levels of pollution.

stefanovich

stefanovich wrote: »

It's so weird that focus has now shifted to the problem of population decline in the West. The only solution to which seems to be the importation of foreign populations.

It's almost as if this population hysteria was used as a political vehicle!

For economists, there is only one objective.
Growth!

Growth must be maintained at all costs, if that means importing people then that will be done.

The current global economic system is hard coded to only function correctly during periods of economic growth.

The GFC of 2008 was an example of what happens when growth stops.
To truly tackle population growth, you first need to shift to an economic system that is not dependent on perpetual growth.

donaghs

xckjoo wrote: »

2) The countries that still have high population growth are generally the least industrialised and so have the lowest levels of pollution.

The issue is bigger than "pollution". Deforestation to make room for people has its own consequences. Not just wildlife extinction, but also the loss carbon sinks, impacts... climate change.

SirGerryAdams

xckjoo wrote: »

2) The countries that still have high population growth are generally the least industrialised and so have the lowest levels of pollution.

If Africa becomes as industrialised as Europe, their population will slow like ours yet their boom in industrialisation will have a far worse impact on emissions.

xckjoo

donaghs wrote: »

The issue is bigger than "pollution". Deforestation to make room for people has its own consequences. Not just wildlife extinction, but also the loss carbon sinks, impacts... climate change.

Ya but the developing countries are sacrificing the forests, etc. to make products for the developed world. Hard to tell them they're not allowed do that when they're barely scraping together enough to live on. We've plenty of money and won't even leave our bogs alone

xckjoo

SirGerryAdams wrote: »

If Africa becomes as industrialised as Europe, their population will slow like ours yet their boom in industrialisation will have a far worse impact on emissions.

You basing that on anything other than opinion?

Edit: Genuine question by the way. If there's information to back that up I'm interested. I've seen talk of evidence that developing countries are finding more value in things like solar energy harvesting due to their higher levels of sunshine and need for more disparate infrastructure.

SirGerryAdams

xckjoo wrote: »

You basing that on anything other than opinion?

Doesn't take a genius to work out that a million people living off nothing, no internet, no proper housing, no anything will consume far far less resources than 100 people driving a car, building a house with concrete, using electricity, using an iPhone made in China etc.

Harry Palmr

Discussion about how to protect Dublin from flooding on Newstalk right now with the City manager (I think) talking about future proofing etc.

xckjoo

SirGerryAdams wrote: »

Doesn't take a genius to work out that a million people living off nothing, no internet, no proper housing, no anything will consume far far less resources than 100 people driving a car, building a house with concrete, using electricity, using an iPhone made in China etc.

Doesn't take a genius to realise that their opinion based on "what's obvious" is usually wrong... People vastly overestimate their own opinions. You may well be right but for now I'll believe the last bit of actual research I read.