Spain and Portugal are at their driest for 1,200 years

Akrasia

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119382261#Comment_119382261

What advice would you give to the new Uk pm on climate change

PokeHerKing

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119382154#Comment_119382154

So how many years to go?

Gaoth Laidir

The index used in the Spanish Met tool I linked to is the SPEI, which is the preferred drought monitoring tool in use globally. It takes into account not only rainfall but also potential evotranspiration. Looking purely at precipitation anomalies doesn't tell the full story.

Orion402

Expunging the history and the academic doctrine of natural selection which led to the death of 6 million people in the Holocaust is horrifying and as a means to demonstrate what happens when a dangerous academic doctrine gains political and media acceptance.

There are those out there who use contrived reasoning to demonstrate a flat Earth assertion while others contend with that ridiculous notion but everyone seems to be enjoying themselves. Raising the standard of consideration is an altogether different approach as the false assertions disappear because genuine climate research is so enjoyable and as interesting as the working of the human body.

Wasting energy on climate change modelling is truly a horrific human condition which attracts those who have settled for its false assertions.

Akrasia

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119382615#Comment_119382615

Humans have broken the natural cycle. We are likely to push the earth into a new equilibrium due to increased Gahags in the atmosphere. That equilibrium can be either hospitable or hostile to human life depending on the actions we take now

PokeHerKing

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119383418#Comment_119383418

So the theory stays a theory because of a new theory yeah?

Hooter23

Spain and portugal have there driest weather for 1,200 years...and all ireland gets out of it is a 1-2 day heatwave....if this is what they call global warming then there still is no hope for our weather

timmyntc

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119383418#Comment_119383418

Humans have broken the natural cycle

Source?

That assertion would require that we know the natural cycle in extreme detail and can predict accurately where it would be less human interference. Not an easy feat given the incredibly long timespans dealt with. How do you know if the cycle is broken in such a small timescale of human emissions in the post-industrial era? Could easily be just a small aberration in the long natural cycle, impossible to know this early.

Orion402

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119383820#Comment_119383820

Researchers don't even know the dynamics behind the natural cycle in general, let alone in detail and that includes the motions which create hemispherical weather cycles known as the seasons. Humans cannot break the natural cycle unless they assume responsibility for controlling the variations in cyclical weather and the underlying dynamics which also create the seasonal variations in daylight/darkness lengths.

Humans did try to break the natural cycle as an intellectual misadventure by conjuring up contrived reasoning to vandalise the relationship between one rotation to the central/stationary Sun which gives us natural daily variations in weather by appealing to the daily change in the position of the stars instead-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYy0EQBnqHI

That awful 17th century mistake leads to a belief that there are more rotations than natural sunrise/noon/sunset cycles in a year-

" It is a fact not generally known that, owing to the difference between solar and sidereal time, the Earth rotates upon its axis once more often than there are [24 hour] days in the year" NASA /Harvard

It would be really nice to encounter an individual who is capable of understanding that the 24 hour day is the only acceptable timekeeping designation and that one rotation has an effect of one sunrise/noon/sunset cycle every 24 hours and a thousand rotations in a thousand 24 hour days.

Yes, things are really this bad.

Oneiric 3

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119382587#Comment_119382587

What a bizarre question.

M.T. Cranium

I would tell the new UK p.m. not to believe everything they hear from experts but of course the sort of person who succeeds in modern society is exactly the sort of person who believes that experts are infallible since they themselves are experts (on politics).

This is how we got into the mess we are in, believing that we have wrecked the weather machine, when in fact all we have done is to tinker with it slightly. And our response should be proportionate to that reality.

Leftists are going to say, thank goodness you're not giving advice to important people, because they will realize that their dreams of wrecking the economy (and the irony being that stuff about wrecking the atmosphere) would be thwarted by a common sense approach and leftist political goals would not be met.

As it is, we are staggering down the road to oblivion, having decided to commit economic (and social) suicide in some vain attempt to fix a problem which we cannot fix and which may not even be a problem.

I should probably retire, obviously I am one of those "old people out of touch" or what leftists call elders in every culture but our own. We will own nothing and be happy, we are told by people who don't plan to own nothing because, well, somebody should be rewarded for saving the earth.

Orion402

The term 'denial' in climate change denial comes from borrowing on Holocaust denial or people who refuse to accept the history behind millions murdered in the death factories of WWII. The Nazi centred their invasion and extermination policies on natural selection, a Victorian races/racism doctrine which is founded on a large part by events in 1840's Ireland, where the imperatives of the invader (Malthus) were joined with the biological deficiencies of the invaded (Darwin/Wallace).

There is no need to expunge the links between an academic doctrine of the mid 19th century and the political actions of the mid 20th century and especially in the topic of climate modelling which raises the term 'denial'. The lesson learned is that when an academic doctrine gains social/political acceptance, it takes on monstrous convictions which fill social media and often headlines the news in order to drive society into hysterics and desperation.

I urge the moderator not to disguise what happened when an academic doctrine got out of control, not because the 1930's German society misused that doctrine but that it applied its awful races/racism principles with enthusiasm -

"I could show fight on natural selection having done and doing more for the progress of civilisation than you seem inclined to admit. Remember what risks the nations of Europe ran, not so many centuries ago of being overwhelmed by the Turks, and how ridiculous such an idea now is. The more civilised so-called Caucasian races have beaten the Turkish hollow in the struggle for existence. Looking to the world at no very distant date, what an endless number of the lower races will have been eliminated by the higher civilised races throughout the world." Charles Darwin 1881

" Under proper guidance, in the course of the final solution the Jews are to be allocated for appropriate labour in the East. Able-bodied Jews, separated according to sex, will be taken in large work columns to these areas for work on roads, in the course of which action doubtless a large portion will be eliminated by natural causes. The possible final remnant will, since it will undoubtedly consist of the most resistant portion, have to be treated accordingly, because it is the product of natural selection and would, if released, act as the seed of a new Jewish revival" Wannsee Conference, 1942

It takes courage to take on wayward ideologies like climate change modelling so that while the Nazis were defeated by the courage of other nations, the underlying academic doctrine which sent a society into enacting atrocities still survives and remains celebrated among those who use it for science vs faith or creationism vs natural selection and things like that.

This is our history and we should own it rather than try to hide it. Computers are needed for things like CGI which will help observers understand planetary climate arising from planetary dynamics so let those who argue at the level of climate change believers/denialists carry on, more reasonable people are asked to raise the level of consideration.

Oneiric 3

The calibre of contesters for the next UK PM, and we are asked as to what advice we would give them?

https://twitter.com/AdamBienkov/status/1549396990051639296

😏

Funny this , but we've been recently informed here in Ireland , that we cannot trust data from the 1850s as regards temperature change , but yet , 1200 years ago ..........

( Ahhh , but that suits a narrative !! ) .

Thelonious Monk

Parts of England have seen zero rainfall in July and are looking at the driest July on record, a dry August will mean drought conditions. As well as record breaking temps this summer.

Danno

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119391983#Comment_119391983

Blog: The UK's wettest and driest months | Historic Droughts (ceh.ac.uk)

February 1891 was extremely dry and the driest calendar month in our records. February has a slight advantage here being our shortest month, but even taking this into consideration it really was a notable month. Many rain gauges recorded very little rain or even no rain at all. The settled conditions favoured frequent fog, and the totals reported from some rain gauges were in fact small amounts of water from the fog and heavy dew rather than rainfall. Outside of the fog however there was plenty of fine sunny weather. In London the observer in West Kensington celebrated this unusual occurrence:

“A rainless month has not occurred in London since July 1800! So we may congratulate ourselves on having seen what hardly anyone living has seen before.”

July 1800 and February 1891 were both extremely dry across the UK.

History is fantastic!

Gaoth Laidir

Not sure how July 2022 can be a record dry month when July 1800 had 0 mm. Can't get drier than that.

Danno

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119392117#Comment_119392117

Maybe the observer was using the rainwater for some homebrew? 😜

Thelonious Monk

I was just parroting what I saw on BBC Weather about an hour ago. Either way, they're going into drought territory in much of England. As are swathes of the USA. Maybe this is normal but it seems to me that there's a lot of drought going on right now.

Gaoth Laidir

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119392182#Comment_119392182

Or it may be the old attribution chestnut that "the probability of dry months is projected to increase, therefore that proves that this dry month was due to agw".

dePeatrick

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119387752#Comment_119387752

You do realise the new PM in UK is likely to be Truss…good luck with telling her anything.

Orion402

It is genuinely nice to see you all look after each other within the ideology of climate change modelling, although it doesn't help raise the standard of consideration. On the other hand, it really is not nice to see those with political influence argue over agriculture even though we are blessed with a maritime climate with plenty of grass arising from our proximity to the Atlantic among other things. Somehow, people forgot we have a maritime climate which doesn't change no matter how small or large our livestock is but then again, common sense doesn't make an appearance in this topic at any level of consideration.

Modelling for interpretation using computers, CGI, graphics and so on should be a brilliant and productive exercise, using computer simulated conclusions with dire predictions is a sign of gamers although short term weather modelling is fine within limits. Obviously readers can't presently tell the difference.

M.T. Cranium

For the question of how much rain has fallen in England, the EWP (England and Wales precip) stands at about 15 mm and will likely finish the month between 20 and 25, the sixth driest July in 256 years of data they have. 1825, 1800, 1911 and probably 1868 will finish drier, and this July may be around 5th or 6th driest so it's not quite as bad as some have implied, albeit that is a regional average and perhaps parts of the south are very close to zero. The hot summer of 1976 also had considerable drought problems in southern England. August looks like it will begin to return to a more normal pattern, so perhaps this drought will eventually be alleviated in the worst hit cases.

Gaoth Laidir

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119392539#Comment_119392539

Alas, all reasoning that will never make it into the Guardian or onto the BBC.

odyboody

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119387752#Comment_119387752

Don't think its a leftist agenda in fairness, After all its big business that are making a fortune by convincing us it our fault while doing nothing to really correct the problem. Sure they are selling us the dream that we can effect change by buying more stuff, changing where the emissions are produced and telling us we are not producing any. In the end until big business really start to make meaningful changes we are only being fooled.

There is also other ice core evidence which shows that a fluctuating climate is the normal for our planet, it is only an abnormally long stable period which has enabled the human race to develop.

Orion402

The nearest to being negative is the demonstrate where even the most basic experience of weather and its underlying cause found in one rotation of the planet was vandalised by empirical modellers using clocks in the late 17th century just as academic gamers misuse computers in ours.

"The first motion, named nuchthemeron by the Greeks, as I said is the rotation which is the characteristic of a day plus a night." Copernicus, Chapter 11, De Revolutionibus

http://www.webexhibits.org/calendars/year-text-Copernicus.html

It is much easier to associate one rotation with one sunrise/noon/sunset cycle insofar as the day/night cycle is anchored to noon along with the timekeeping 24 hour cycle.

At the level of computer gaming the Earth science of climate, whether a proponent or an opponent of its dire conclusions or disputing whether it is human caused or natural, the fantasy is maintained so long as the original assertion that humans control the weather/temperatures is not challenged. Considering this not only took up a large proportion of the news this morning, but also brought in commentaries on challenging an academic collective, it is remarkable that the same academics haven't the slightest interest in planetary climate as a property of planetary dynamics first and foremost.

As far as I can tell, the entire issue of climate change modelling can be reduced to the Guinness Book Of Records where it is all about record breaking weather events and that never can be the basis of anything.

Whatdoesitmatter

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119394234#Comment_119394234

Your words give me wood

Oneiric 3

I don't really get this 'leftist' thing. But with all respect to MT, this is just toxic N. American 'culture war' speak that has no place on this side of the Atlantic. What American's call 'leftist' is something I don't recognise as being remotely left-wing.

Back on topic. Droughts have always occurred in the UK and the south of the country in particular has always been more prone than most. I don't think a longer term trend (using E & W data) can be reasonably picked up either way. Some of our own biggest droughts that have lasted months have occurred in the long gone past.

Whatdoesitmatter

Mod Note:

@Orion402 Please do not post in this thread again

Danno

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119392206#Comment_119392206

Therein lies the problem...

I was just parroting what I saw on BBC Weather about an hour ago.

The sooner that ordinary people realise that vast swathes of the media which really are just mega-corporations are feeding them a diet of guilt and shame along with a generous topping of bull manure the better.

The newscaster that uttered those words into the microphone - do they give two fooks about the environment as they pick up their six-figure salaries? They're out the gap a few hours later into their large land cruisers on to uncongested streets (as the peasants cannot afford the charges) and out into the leafy suburbs to their two-million pound mansion. They'll be by the pool having their house maid cook up an avocado stir fry to be washed down with a Californian wine as the sun goes down.

Orion402

There was a fella on RTE radio yesterday declaring that the scientific community is a collective so the congregation must face in the same direction as the academic priest with no input towards the modelling or dire conclusions. It is like the Latin mass of old where the priest does not face the congregation, no dissent is allowed and the purpose of the congregation is to act as cheerleaders for whatever is projected as truth and authority. It is a waste of time to appeal to such an entity so it comes down to those individuals who can take wider perspectives in order to return to the topic with a more competent and confident view.

Gaoth Laidir

These are probably more of the same type of climate extremist headbangers who got onto the track at the F1 GP at Silverstone and - dare I say it - probably started the London fires last week to make a point. Here they are with their latest stunt. What's the compressional strength of ice? Not too high, I hope.

https://twitter.com/BuckSexton/status/1552120290775269376?t=hnSzzhZEZAipZJ2i-hPfDQ&s=09

ZX7R

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119401720#Comment_119401720

See how they feel when a loved one takes there life that way.

Disgusting behaviour.

Orion402

Climate change modelling is perhaps the final expression of a subculture which emerged centuries ago in a belief that experimental sciences scale up to Earth sciences and solar system structure. The other strand is computer modelling so that academic computer gaming attempted to extend the success of short term weather modelling over a number of days to climate itself, even though planetary climate is derived first and foremost from planetary dynamics.

Whether it is unfortunate followers using a noose to prove their convictions or politicians inflicting harm on Irish society for some vague goal of preventing Ireland's maritime climate from changing into ???, it is clear that the standard of consideration is unfortunately so low in order to restore a balance.

It is dismaying to see contributors to this weather forum play their part in pandering to an overreaching version of weather that does nothing to distinguish weather from climate clearly.

highdef

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119402789#Comment_119402789

Can you explain (in layman's terms, so that most people can understand/visualise your explanation) how planetary dynamics are causing what is in-arguably a change in the climate on planet earth in recent times? It's clear you are the expert on planetary dynamics and as you say that the climate of the planet is derived from that, I would assume that you can shed some light on to the actual cause of climate change, unlike those foolish scientists who clearly know nothing and merely speculate and postulate.

OldRio

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119401720#Comment_119401720

Wow, that's some take. From protesting to arson. As an ex firefighter I've never known that but........ enjoy your rant.

Gaoth Laidir

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119403449#Comment_119403449

Because reckless behaviour is so beyond these people, right? Protesting on the track at the start of a Grand Prix, putting their and many other lives at risk, is just unheard of. Those fires were more of these divine spontaneous combustions with no human hand at play? A row of fly-tip along a road up in flames just like that. Oh yes, because the UK broke the 40-degree mark. Right. I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out that they were started maliciously, like the majority of wild fires in Europe (yes, they are).

Gaoth Laidir

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119403082#Comment_119403082

Oh ffs don't encourage him. You know he's unable to converse with other humans or say anything coherent or related to anything remotely on-topic and will just copy and paste another essay written by a monkey on a laptop.

Thargor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119403816#Comment_119403816

Yeah and you're right there in the seat beside him in the special class though arent you? Whats your latest theory? The fires in London were nothing to do with the heat, they were started by climate extremists? So when the London Fire Brigade says they had their busiest day since the Blitz dealing with random fires and people collapsing all over the city they're just part of the liberul conspiracy aswell I suppose?

I see Danno who I assume is still supposed to be the mod of this "Science" forum thanking the complete dribbling lunacy about climate theory being like "a priest at the old Latin mass" up at the top of the page aswell, you just have to laugh, poor auld Orion was a figure of fun when he showed up but once a lunatic starts coming out with the right kind of propaganda and he gets welcomed into the crew 🤣

Gaoth Laidir

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119404071#Comment_119404071

Ah Thargor, long time, still no contribution of value! And still unable or unwilling to read what was actually written. I said most fires in dry season (Europe, Australia, wherever) are started manually, many of these maliciously. Things don't just spontaneously combust because the air reaches some magical headline figure of 40.0 degrees. I was amazed to see such lush green areas burning on that Sky News aerial footage, the same one that showed a line of washing machines and other human rubbish on fire along a road. Yeah, all of this just started of its own accord, right? The same Fire Brigade were repeatedly putting out pleas for people not to have barbeques, etc., but from what I could see these fires started more in waste ground rather than somewhere you'd light up a bbq.

I may be totally ott and wrong in my assessment and so be it. At least I have an opinion to give instead of waiting in the wings with never anything more than a personal jibe to offer. You yourself allowed the likes of Banana Republic, Orion, etc. all post their made-up nonsense without as much as a word to offer, but only when certain posters post do you have anything to say. It's a Science forum alright, so why not try posting some science for a change? The mods (of which Dannon doesn't seem to be one any more) seem to be absent here anyway so maybe go ahead and continue with your drivel instead.

OldRio

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119403767#Comment_119403767

You linked protesters to arsonists in your first post and now you're off on another rant talking about spontaneous combustion.

Not only have you deduced that the fires were started maliciously but you seem to know who caused them as well. Have you informed the relevant authorities? I'm sure a little Sherlock Holmes like yourself could be of great use.

Gaoth Laidir

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119404607#Comment_119404607

The majority of fires are started by humans, and many of them are maliciously. Fact. That's in actual arid areas, such as Iberia, Sardinia, etc. It takes a lot more to get a fire going in a lush green leafy part of London, so the probability of being maliciously started is even greater. These headbangers don't seem to stop at anything, so it's not at all out of the realms of possibility that they could have been started to make a point and highlight the great "climate emergency". What better day to do it than on the much-awaited and hyped 40-degree day?

Orion402

" It's clear you are the expert on planetary dynamics and as you say that the climate of the planet is derived from that,"

As far as I am concerned, there are no experts, however, it would help if there were the only thing that mattered - gentlemen. Well worth taking on board those who sought to be productive and creative without needing a diploma or doctorate to prove it-

" We should not be able to say of a man, “He is a mathematician,” or a “preacher,” or “eloquent”; but that he is “a gentleman.” That universal quality alone pleases me." Pascal

https://www.bartleby.com/48/1/1.html

If the issue goes negative, it is a misadventure described above where the assertions are built on false premises and the misuse of computers just as previously the empirical modellers misused clocks to arrive at an exceptionally dumb conclusion that one sunrise/noon/sunset cycle is Not one rotation of the planet.

The positive approach uses imaging to demonstrate that the behaviour of planetary temperatures daily and annually are a property of a moving Earth in a Sun-centred system. Until the seasonal variations are accounted for properly, it is impossible to move on to our planet's unique climate in comparison to other planets in the solar system.

These forums always have their contrarians with lots of drama attached, but this is as much an appeal for those who are competent in animation, graphics, CGI and so on in order to construct a proper climate framework that doesn't involve politicians making fools of themselves on account of academic computer gamers who have conjured up a fantasy world with nothing but dire conclusions.

This is an adventure to raise the standard of consideration rather than contend with climate change modelling with its believers/deniers. It is also a lot of fun whether the forensics of the negative approach to the topic or the positive approach but better if people have abilities in both.

Gaoth Laidir

See what I mean, @highdef ?

M.T. Cranium

North American experience with wildfires is similar, a disturbing number of them appear to be deliberately set, and another portion are clearly due to human negligence (like tossing a butt out a window onto a dry forest margin) and at some point that negligence is hardly different in legal terms from deliberate arson.

Another growing cause especially in California comes from ill-advised "green" initiatives to leave fully grown vegetation in place along hydro-electric lines. When the usual combination of high temperatures and strong down-canyon winds sets up, this leads to sparking from the oscillating hydro lines and fires are set in the dry brush, spreading rapidly to nearby forests. In other jurisdictions, this practice has not been encouraged and this is one reason why California has seen worse wildfire impacts than elsewhere. Another reason of course is that the urban population of California has spread rapidly into "interface" zones where their homes are more likely to be in the path of spreading fires.

This is not to say that a significant number of our wildfires are not set by lightning, that was probably the main cause of the second wave of fires we had in BC last year (the first wave seemed to originate from various other causes brought on by the severe heat dome temperatures).

Going back to the political discussion, I think one poster was trying to say that the climate change movement is not of the political left but originates with big business and their conservative agenda. This, I would say, is a misread of political trends. Climate change has its origins in the green political movement and that is clearly of the left. There may be a split in the left in which some remnants of an older "working class left" still exist and some of those people may feel a disconnect with the new left which is clearly a movement of wealthy boomers and their many different political interest groups. Basically, as I see it, almost all politics nowadays are variants of globalism and the new left, even some centrist and self-described conservative political parties are following this agenda, perhaps more cautiously in some cases.

Big business may have been aligned with the political right in the younger days of many of us here, up to the mid to late 1990s, but the corporate agenda is basically to maximize profit and when business leaders realized that they now had an essentially groupthink-brainwashed consumer horde outside their gates, they rather quickly switched sides and now they position themselves as globalist (we are just as woke as you, don't let our country club memberships fool you, really, look, we are different now) ... so the old conservative coalition that was so successful under Reagan and Thatcher (due to an anti-communist foundation) now does not exist, it has split into three groups, neo-conservative (globalist war hawks), faux-con (conservative in name only, unwilling to make a complete split from the brand name, but already across the political Rubicon in terms of a belief structure), and libertarians and cultural nationalists who have formed a last stand alliance in most western countries, vilified by the media and all their political adversaries, because not woke enough, or (and this I assume is the "toxic" part) willing to call a spade a spade and say that people should govern themselves and not wait around for Karl Schwab, Davos and the WEF to send their disciples to govern. In Canada unfortunately the majority have said "you go right ahead, Karl, and Justin, we sure like your socks" and have decided to assist the globalist movement in dismantling Canada's economy and society in the interest of rich patrons of globalism such as the Middle eastern oil powers (why do you suppose it is that Canadian oil is "dirty" but Saudi oil is "clean" and why do you suppose this is what a stumbling horde of brainwashed individuals are heard to recite on their way to pick up the latest government benefit cheque drawn from made up money that will one day soon not even have any value at all). If this is toxic, so be it, I look at it as survivalist. I don't want to be governed by Karl Schwab, whether he's a socialist, a liberal, a communist or a fascist, and maybe he is a bit of all those, having drawn on whatever works to bring the desired results.

Also I don't appreciate having our science which had such a long and distinguished record through many decades hijacked by people who know nothing about weather or climate, pretend they know a lot, and are transparently using climate events to drive a dangerous political agenda. Here again, if this much truth is toxic, perhaps it's a good thing. Where else are you going to hear it? Will the "traditional left" who have nothing to do with all this (so they say) expose these truths? Unlikely. They are too busy inventing new narratives that have almost zero appeal as most have moved on and chosen their new 21st century political homes. And I would conclude by saying, most have chosen unwisely. We go through this about once a generation or two. The conservative revival of the early 1980s was mostly based on socialist failures of the 1970s. One can only hope the same cycle is about to begin, but with the amount of societal control gained by the globalist forces, that seems very improbable. The truth may never come out because instead we may descend into a series of ever more dangerous regional wars that will end up in a global catastrophe when forces align in such a way that nobody has anything left to lose. How close are we to this now? Five years? Ten? I am rather old, I may not survive to see it. But it's coming.

Orion402

" I see Danno who I assume is still supposed to be the mod of this "Science" forum thanking the complete dribbling lunacy about climate theory being like "a priest at the old Latin mass"

When a contributor raises the standard of consideration in any topic, they do not need to attack anyone nor do they need to dilute what is being said as you have just done. A subculture which demands that the cheerleaders follow the dictates and imperatives without question attracts those who don't reason for themselves and climate change modelling as one symptom of these monstrosities among others, creates a false atmosphere for discussion. I do not contend with those who come up with contrived reasoning to support their assertion of a flat Earth while others may contend with them and likewise, the idea that humans can control the weather by doing or not doing something is also from that type of utterly ridiculous assertions. Of course, this is written for people who can step outside the conceptual bubble and recognise that planetary climate is rooted in planetary dynamics.

I brought up natural selection as an example of a society which ran with an academic doctrine, in this case 1930's German society, where they were unquestioning in the natural selection imperative to invade and exterminate based on the idea of superior/inferior 'races'. It is remarkable that after the WWII Holocaust that the academic doctrine not only survived but continues to be passed on from one generation to the next as an intellectual achievement. That is what society is up against, an unbending academic community that only knows how to protect itself, but also does not know how to change. You may not know it, however, I am certain that other, more reasonable people with a sense of integrity do.

Once again, it takes information sharing and raising the standard of consideration to counter those who imagine discussion is point scoring or some other bag of tricks to dilute appreciation of the Earth science of climate as it really exists.

Thargor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119404140#Comment_119404140

Oh look still the angry little forum policeman dictating who can say what... Well you can lie and claim not to have said it but its right there a few posts above yours... did you miss the bit where a retired firefighter took you up on it aswell or did that not happen too? Throw in a bit of gaslighting and strawman crap about spontaneous combustion which nobody claimed, real value being added to the forum there alright.

Whats your value contribution that you're always demanding from others here exactly then wannabe forum policeman? "I may be totally ott and wrong in my assessment and so be it. At least I have an opinion to give". Oh yeah very scientific approach professor! A wild conspiracy theory about environmental campaigner arsonists burning down rows of houses on the worst day for the London Fire Brigade since WWII and not a peep out of the police and the media about it? Jesus Christ. Nothing to do with AGW making drought and fire conditions more and more prolonged and prevalent year on year exactly in line with predictions no, only geniuses like you and Orion402 can see the real "science".

Gaoth Laidir

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119406586#Comment_119406586

"Angry little forum policeman". Look who's talking!

Before yesterday you hadn't posted in this forum for almost 9 months, and that post back then was what? A personal jab at me, of course. Going back further and further the same posting pattern of only personal insults and namecalling. Before the switch to the new webs(h)ite last year such a pattern would probably have had you banned, but maybe the mod rules have changed now too. It seems anything goes.

Do you want to give some scientific reasons why you think only agw caused drier conditions this year, given that many other years in the 19th and early 20th centuries had worse droughts? Or did you miss that discussion too? Put your money where your mouth is and come up with some figures.

kippy

The climate change 'debate' is an interesting one. There are countless people who think humans aren't having an impact on climate and countless others who think they are. Plenty think all of this is natural and cyclical and plenty who think human activity is excarbarating the situation.

On one hand you have people who think we shouldn't change our behaviour and on the other people who think we should.

Now if you take this on a purely climate change angle that may be fine. Perhaps if we continue as we are things will remain cyclical and we had no impact on anything but really, when common sense comes into it you really have to accept that we need to change our behaviours drastically and not from a climate change perspective although the change in behaviour would help those that accept human led climate change is real.

Our consumerism based society is leading to a hell of a lot of negative consequences that we have to accept are bad for the human race ultimately. Whether is it slave labour and questionable work practices, microplastics, utilising finite materials, throwaway culture, and so on. The list is endless.

Not saying we need to stop investing in tech or go back to the stone age, but that we need to take a long hard look at where we are going.

Gaoth Laidir

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119406756#Comment_119406756

Good points. We need to get off fossil fuels anyway as it's a finite resource and there are so many more cleaner and free energy sources available, if only the will were there to use them. But then you have nimbys who don't like the look of a wind farm on the side of a mountain or 10 km out to sea off the east coast. No excuse for not using wave/tidal or even nuclear energy for our energy needs. The very mention of the word "nuclear" sends people running but in many cases they're not quite sure why.