"Green" policies are destroying this country

The Green party are not equal to what people understand about climate change.

Climate change denial is a loony fringe activity. To deny observed reality is a form of madness.

Yes, Green policies ARE trying their best to destroy this country.....and any other country that tolerates their foolishness.

Look, Ladies and Gentlemen. Every cult, religion, cause, -ism etc. has always had its fanatics, often referred to as zealots or loonies. Yes, the climate is changing and we have to get used to it but this latest -ism is no different so it has its own army of fanatics subdivided into various "platoons" such as the likes of JSO, XR, Friends of the Earth, Thunberg's Infant-ry, The Fridays for Future Wan-Corps, Major Eamonn Ryan and his Green Paranoids, the Get-rid of-the-Farting-Cows Brigade, the Besotted-with-Leaves Outfit, plus one or two outliers on here and, of course, RTE's DoomMeister himself, George Lee, fresh from his several-times-a-day promotions of those crazy Microsoft Excel predictions that came from the obsessive self appointed Covid Prophets of Doom all done in the name of putting fear into the population.

So, relax everyone. Take a deep breath. Don't live in fear. Ignore the crazy Excel predictions that start with an agenda and work backwards. Even an Accrington Stanley FC fan and moderately experienced Excel user could produce a spreadsheet that would predict his team to win the English Premier League by 2030. Not going to happen.

Bear in mind that if every man, woman and child in Ireland did exactly as all the fanatic "platoons" put together demand it would not amount to a hill of green beans in stopping or slowing the changes in climate. That's the reality.

So, if you are going to borrow 50 grand don't waste it on "retrofitting" your lovely houses and installing useless and noisy "heat pumps". Install that en-suite you've always wanted, a bright new front porch or a conservatory and don't forget that Mick O'Leary has a large fleet of jets waiting to transport you to your dream destinations. But, if you still believe that the Irish Sea will soon be lapping its waves halfway up the Sugar Loaf then, by all means, build an Ark instead.

The only thing to consider with regard to the Lybian floods is

Where they more frequent than previous floods ? The jury is out since there is insufficient data. If it happens again in a few more years then the certainty it was caused by global warming rises.

Was it more sever than previous floods ?

The evidence for this is much stronger. Conditions were exceptional since the temperatures were elevated by around 3c more than normal. This allowed far more water and energy to accumulate in the low system which meant when it started to rained it rained far more strongly. Those dams have withstood previous floods but this time they were overwhelmed by a larger body of water.

If this flood were an isolated event we could easily dismiss it as just normal, but the reality is that the med region has experienced a significant number of freak floods this year from Spain to Greece and this is on the back of similar patterns over the last few years across the region and especially in the western region with more exposure to Atlantic weather systems.

There was a green councilor on the the radio yesterday evening talking about this, and he spoke with sense, with common sense and painted the changes as a good thing in a reasonable and pragmatic way. Didn't go on about cars being the devil or any of that nonsense. Gave the reasons for the change, the areas impacted and generally sold it well. I was so shocked listening to a green councillor speaking in such a way and not being a prophet of doom that I had to pause my hedge cutting.

Classic denial.

Climate changes under forcings - there are no natural forcing which account for the current warming, that is because we know what is causing it - an increase in atmospheric GHG produced by mankind.

What happened in the past under natural forcings is frankly irrelivant to what we are currently experiencing.

if you disagree with this statement please outline the natural cause of the current climate warming.

People deny that there's climate? That's a new one

Interesting one from the RTE Archives about limiting cars in Cork, way back in 1978. I suppose they hadn't factored in the growth of cars in subsequent years. Still interesting that cities, even back then, were being restricted for cars

Didn't hear it but I bet it was Michael Pidgeon, he seems a great guy and a great communicator

Ok, looks like we found our very first actual climate change denier on the thread. Don't tar us all with the same brush, though. For the record, I'm not one nor have I ever been. I am proudly anti-Green.

The idea of 'forcing' is an interesting one. Another one is 'positive feedback loop'. You just have to remember that these terms have no meaning in climate. They are constructed to give an impression they are real. They assume they are real so they must exist. Pity then there is zero data to back it up. Show me the body of evidence instead of mere conjecture. At least, that's what a proper judge would say in a trial. Most Greens clearly do not in the least know what they are talking about. Some of them insult you and copy and paste a 'paper' that supposedly proves it which is full of assumptions and non sequiteurs. I mean, it is baffling to see the sheer amount of displayed ignorance. No wonder real scientists or students won't go anywhere near it. I pity clever climate scientists. They are surrounded by idiots..

Here you go this should clear up your confusion/ignorance;

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

"Radiative forcing (or climate forcing[1]) is the change in energy flux in the atmosphere caused by natural or anthropogenic factors of climate change as measured in watts per meter squared.[2] It is a scientific concept used to quantify and compare the external drivers of change to Earth's energy balance.[3]: 1–4  These external drivers are distinguished from climate feedbacks and internal variability, which also influence the direction and magnitude of imbalance.

Positive radiative forcing means Earth receives more incoming energy from sunlight than it radiates to space. This net gain of energy will cause warming. Conversely, negative radiative forcing means that Earth loses more energy to space than it receives from the Sun, which produces cooling. A planet in radiative equilibrium with its parent star and the rest of space can be characterized by net zero radiative forcing and by a planetary equilibrium temperature.[4]

Radiative forcing on Earth is meaningfully evaluated at the tropopause and at the top of the stratosphere. It is quantified in units of watts per square meter, and often summarized as an average over the total surface area of the globe. Radiative forcing varies with solar insolation, surface albedo, and the atmospheric concentrations of radiatively active gases – commonly known as greenhouse gases – and aerosols."

This is standard climate termology even though you don't like it. More denial really.

There's some serious Dunning Kruger effect vibe from your post.