"Green" policies are destroying this country

I wasn't asked to number them. The assertion was that they don't exist. They do. I've showed some

Good for you. And there are peer reviewed papers that are bullshit. Agreed? Yeah? Isn't that the point I was making. Not all, some. I've showed you some. The point I was making was that you and others got up on a high horse when someone said that peer reviews aren't all they are cracked up to be. I've shown examples now where they are right. Not always, sometimes. And if they can be right for denial papers, then the pro papers can also have peer reviewed and published stuff that is hocus pocus.

There is a debate about CO2. Some people say it's the problem, others aren't convinced. Hence debate. I think it has an input of course, but it's not the only one. I think fossil fuels are the main cause of changes in the climate, driving CO2 levels higher. Never denied that. Or have you a link or something to show where I have? If not, button it. You're arguing with yourself based on your thoughts about what I believe. It's tiresome having to correct the record, yet you won't man up and concede that a) studies exist denying climate change and b) the peer review process isn't foolproof like I asked previously.

Let me state it more obvious: i am in doubt about Co2 causing any significant temperature difference. I am not totally certain about my position but i am confident it is right. And i can back it up. But that position puts me in the 'denier' camp by the opposition who does not grand me my doubt and weaponizes every opportunity to suppress voices of dissent, even from highly qualified scientists.

My position is: quid pro quo.

If you dont know what that means look it up.

And you are backing up the point I made.

There are plenty of people on the fence, in the middle of the arguments.

But the two polarised groups whom feel strongest will probably never agree and of course, that disagreement will suspend progress.

Especially when the minority group feels unlistened to and somehow on the wrong side of the tracks.

Education is always good, but to move that Poll question cloeer to the heart of the matter, would you say only 4% of the population are prepared to change their lifestyle, in order to offset climate change?

That 96% will also include people that agree climate change is happening but dont agree that it is man-made.

My main point though is that minorities generally are often shouted down in todays debate.

I dont just mean climate related issues, I mean any topical debate in which a group of people may find themselves in the minority.

I think that oppresive tendancy breeds resentment and a mistrust in authority, the media, the govt etc, from those that hold a minority opinion on any subject.

A repercussion of which is that when really important issues such as climate change are discussed, people are default sceptical.

And a lot of people have learnt to keep quiet and not express their opinion, if it does not accord with the populist opinion.

We seem to have developed a society in which it is dangerous to voice thoughts that contrast the standard opinion.

That isnt good for debate, but I think the real danger is that the less people feel empowered to voice opinion, the more anti-establishment they become.

We really need the world to pull together on climate change, but the toxicity around debate in recent years has silenced people.

That silence hasnt made them change their minds, though. It has made them steadfast & stubborn in their opposition and thus, harder to bring onboard.

If CO2 is not causing the observed temperature increases, then what is?

Nobody on this thread has objected to taking measures needed to adapt to the effects of increased precipitation due to climate change. Some people want proper sustainable long term solutions, others want quick fixes that the experts in the field say will not work and may make things worse.

No, i am not backing you up. Im against yr proposition. It is an ignorant position. Ignorant because you assume you have to be on a 'side'. If you are 'on the fence' you don't matter as long as you keep quiet but if u are speaking out stating your neutral position with any kind of force on a big media platform you are put into the denier camp. The greens are adamant that any doubt is nibbed in the bud. Those 2 camps you are talking about is the direct result of the greens unwilling to let anyone escape from their ideological top down compliance rules. Their intolerance of a different position on climate change is noted. They bring out the weapons. They are fanatical in their approach.

So no, thank you. The 'you are either with us or against us'approach is on them, not simply the result of two camps battling it out. The greens are into concentration camps and they want to fill them with 'heretics'.

It's time for you to face the facts

Read back. A poster requested them, which I understood as being a challenge to find some as they believed, none existed. Post #27252

And you yourself, plus other posters jumped on a post that suggested peer reviews weren't foolproof. Here you are telling us all how peer reviews work, and are basically, bulletproof

I'm no right wing loon, just a simple guy ripping your own argument to smithereens.

Almost everyone in the state. Just a few posts back we're given a handy link to a survey

61% != "almost everyone"

Few other interesting bits in that.

• 61% think it's personally important, but 90% think citizens should do more. That to me reads like it's someone elses problem and they should do more before the 61% are affected personally
• 63% think it will harm them personally
• Only 70% think it's already harming people, or will in the next 10 years. Don't see much panic there
• 90% think that business should do more, yet most business couldn't give a toss (see recent Irish Times survey - https://www.irishtimes.com/business/2023/10/08/business-turning-a-deaf-ear-to-the-green-regime/)
• Only 68% want peat, coal or oil banned for home heating! And only 64% think there should be higher taxes on petrol or diesel
• Only 19% would join a campaign to get more climate action going

The agri thing brought up in the survey again points, once more, to more agri bashing. No mention of transport (where emissions are rising) or even aviation within that sector (where the Taoiseach wants to increase aviation). Agri emissions are primarily methane, from a national herd that has grown by ~4% in 50 years. I've asked plenty of times how much methane has grown in the same period - always ignored (if it's more than 4%, then the problem lies elsewhere).

Anyway, my conclusions from the survey is that people believe it's happening, it might affect them personally, maybe not in the next 10 years and someone else should be doing more to stop it.

I think you missed the point.

I didnt say there were only 2 sides.

I said there are 2 sides that are polarised, the deniers and the advocates.

There is a 3rd group in the middle.

I didnt say that 3rd group didnt matter.

You seem to be inventing arguments and arguing with yourself.

You can indeed.