Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => Politics & Current Affairs => Topic started by: Sriram on August 01, 2018, 07:26:42 AM
-
Hi everyone,
Here is an article about this. Climate change has finally 'hit home' for many in the developed world...
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/07/31/opinions/climate-crisis-is-upon-us-opinion-intl/index.html
*********
This summer's sizzling temperatures, savage droughts, raging wildfires, floods and acute water shortages -- from Japan to the Arctic Circle, California to Greece -- are surely evidence beyond any reasonable doubt that the climate crisis is upon us now.
This is the new normal -- until it gets worse.
We, the entire global community, the residents of this planet, must finally grasp the urgency at hand and undertake dramatic, meaningful measures -- initiatives beyond the modest goals of 2015 Paris climate accord -- to stave off nothing less than the destruction of civilization as we know it.
Yet the headlines still read "When The Weather Is Extreme, Is Climate Change To Blame?"
We've got to move past the false, stubborn debate about whether global warming is happening or not. Obviously it is, plentiful research has underscored this for years, and with the natural disasters everywhere we're feeling it now. Those who still don't get it may have stuck their heads in the sand -- or perhaps they're lying to themselves.
As individuals, of course we can curb our consumption and make our lifestyles as sustainable as possible. But as citizens we have to mobilize too and force our elected leaders (and unelected leaders in China and elsewhere) to tackle the industrial giants whose fortunes are tied up in petrochemical generation.
Until this summer, many in the developed world probably assumed that global warming would only affect the undeveloped and the far-away. But global warming has hit home for all of us in 2018.
If empathy for others or future generations can't inspire concern, then let pure self-interest dictate action.
Whatever the motive, the time for half measures is past.
*********
Do you think that, at this stage, any changes we make in our life styles or even Govt. policy changes are going to make any difference? I don't think so.
I also think that the actual changes are going to be sudden and unpredictable. Up to one point they might appear predictable but after that there could be a sudden collapse. Like falling off a cliff. In fact, there could be a series of sudden collapses.
Cheers.
Sriram
-
It's not often I find myself in compete agreement with you Sririam, but I do here.
I think humanity has gone too far, the vested interests are too strong and we are basically too late to make enough changes to reverse things. We can possibly slow them down, or halt things at a point, but I am doubtful there is even the will to do that throughout the world.
-
.... and today is this year's 'earth overshoot day' ......https://www.overshootday.org/
-
The pace of climate change is frightening. :o
-
...
Do you think that, at this stage, any changes we make in our life styles or even Govt. policy changes are going to make any difference? I don't think so.
Yes they will. However, as we have made hardly any significant changes over the last 25 years, climate will be become more extreme over the next 25 years or so, before any actions that we take now will start having a noticeable effect.
I also think that the actual changes are going to be sudden and unpredictable. Up to one point they might appear predictable but after that there could be a sudden collapse. Like falling off a cliff. In fact, there could be a series of sudden collapses.
...
This depends on what action is taken. There are a number of different models predicting change, but the actions we take determine which ones we will track closest too.
-
Do you think that, at this stage, any changes we make in our life styles or even Govt. policy changes are going to make any difference? I don't think so.
I also think that the actual changes are going to be sudden and unpredictable. Up to one point they might appear predictable but after that there could be a sudden collapse. Like falling off a cliff. In fact, there could be a series of sudden collapses.
Cheers.
Sriram
Only a drastic change of directions and priorities by governments and electorates could sway things. The Paris agreement was a triumph for diplomacy full of noble aspirations but the devil is in the detail and large sectors of government are hoping to carry on as normal, granting permits for fracking, building new runways and motorways, aiming for economic growth on a finite planet, promising us all we can have our hyperconsumerist lifestyle cake and eat it with no comeback.
And climate change is only number one of two existential threats to humanity, the other being biodiversity loss, with species going extinct at an estimated one thousand times the average natural background rate. I think we have created a perfect storm for ourselves but we should be OK, the government is busy rearranging the deckchairs.
From Kevin Anderson, Deputy Director, Tyndall Centre, on Twitter :
"we're in a genetic cul-de-sac; clever enough to understand the problem, but too stupid, selfish and weak to respond"
-
Another article on climate change and the approaching apocalypse (if you think that is "project fear" you are correct, there is a lot to fear):
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/apr/26/were-doomed-mayer-hillman-on-the-climate-reality-no-one-else-will-dare-mention?CMP=fb_gu
-
The only thing that gives me any hope is that we have as a species predicted all of the last 4,352nd times that we are doomed. And to be fair, it couldn't happen to a worser species.
-
Well...predictions are becoming more accurate..so I think the end is really nigh this time around...at least for many species and even many humans... :(
-
All life on earth will be extinguished someday - so what?
The point is to put that off by better managing our activities now and maximising whatever benefit there is in it up to that point.
If appropriate we could create artificial lifeforms capable of thriving in a world or universe otherwise inhospitable to biological life - but is there any reason to?
-
Another depressing item: https://www.pri.org/stories/2018-09-13/scientists-say-25-years-left-fight-climate-change
-
Another depressing item: https://www.pri.org/stories/2018-09-13/scientists-say-25-years-left-fight-climate-change
We're screwed. As torridon quoted up-thread: "we're in a genetic cul-de-sac; clever enough to understand the problem, but too stupid, selfish and weak to respond".
-
Another depressing item: https://www.pri.org/stories/2018-09-13/scientists-say-25-years-left-fight-climate-change
seems overly optimistic
-
A nice timeline of global average temperatures in the contexts of human history :
https://xkcd.com/1732/ (https://xkcd.com/1732/)
Share it through your wider networks, raise awareness.
-
Animation illustrating temperature by country since 1900
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yIHxOui9nQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yIHxOui9nQ)
-
Meanwhile...... http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/
-
It is interesting to think thatat some, maybe not hundreds of years into the future, time, it could well happen that random mutations, of which no-one is yet aware, might prove to be just what is needed to enable parts of the human species to find they are adapted to whatever the climate changes may be. Or not, of course.
-
It is interesting to think thatat some, maybe not hundreds of years into the future, time, it could well happen that random mutations, of which no-one is yet aware, might prove to be just what is needed to enable parts of the human species to find they are adapted to whatever the climate changes may be. Or not, of course.
I don't think it is human adaptability that is the concern. Humans can live in pretty much every climate from the poles to the equator thanks to technology. The real problem is how everything else is going to adapt, including the species that provide us with food.
-
The real problem is how everything else is going to adapt, including the species that provide us with food.
And on that point:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/30/humanity-wiped-out-animals-since-1970-major-report-finds?CMP=fb_gu&fbclid=IwAR3MoI7p7kqFjtOUfETPAy7mVy9YUwNZ1o9s4vmiqOe2hsC6FO36te9NIyI
-
Trump is undermined by climate change report from his own administration
https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/11/23/major-trump-administration-climate-report-says-damages-are-intensifying-across-country/?utm_term=.9d145ecfe869 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/11/23/major-trump-administration-climate-report-says-damages-are-intensifying-across-country/?utm_term=.9d145ecfe869)
Full report : https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/ (https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/)
The day after it was reported that atmospheric carbon has now reached levels not seen since the Pliocene, it's good to see US federal agencies not bowing to the regressive anti-science Trump agenda
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46325168
Trump's refusal to implement climate change policies should be an impeachable offence. >:(
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46325168
Trump's refusal to implement climate change policies should be an impeachable offence. >:(
Why? His refusal to implement them is without doubt damaging, immoral and based on the most stupid reasoning I've seen on display for sometime. But why an impeachable offence?
Most of us by the same reasoning are guilty, I know I am. We are still driving to work and the supermarket, taking flights on holiday and generally doing our best to get through the planets resources as soon as is possible, without regard for the consequences.
We all act as if it's somebody else's problem to a certain extent. I'm interested in why you think the president of the USA should be any different?
If you sense a certain irritation in my posting I apologise in advance, but a statement using the word "should" in the way you do really isn't anything but an expression of your own wishes.
I for example could say: "In any modern progressive society the Royal Family should not exist". Yet they do. You I think probably disagree with that statement, but in every way I can think of, except for save an appeal to tradition, it makes sense. But my statement isn't going to change anything. Neither is yours.
-
Why? His refusal to implement them is without doubt damaging, immoral and based on the most stupid reasoning I've seen on display for sometime. But why an impeachable offence?
Most of us by the same reasoning are guilty, I know I am. We are still driving to work and the supermarket, taking flights on holiday and generally doing our best to get through the planets resources as soon as is possible, without regard for the consequences.
We all act as if it's somebody else's problem to a certain extent. I'm interested in why you think the president of the USA should be any different?
If you sense a certain irritation in my posting I apologise in advance, but a statement using the word "should" in the way you do really isn't anything but an expression of your own wishes.
I for example could say: "In any modern progressive society the Royal Family should not exist". Yet they do. You I think probably disagree with that statement, but in every way I can think of, except for save an appeal to tradition, it makes sense. But my statement isn't going to change anything. Neither is yours.
At least we recognise there is a problem, Trump doesn't.
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46325168
Trump's refusal to implement climate change policies should be an impeachable offence. >:(
It's a disgrace, but you can't impeach a President because you don't like their policies.
-
It's a disgrace, but you can't impeach a President because you don't like their policies.
Which are endangering the planet and all life forms.
-
Which are endangering the planet and all life forms.
I agree, but even so.
-
It's almost as though some group of ape like creatures have taken control of the planet and are running amok, consuming and destroying as much as they can with no thought for the future :(
-
It's almost as though some group of ape like creatures have taken control of the planet and are running amok, consuming and destroying as much as they can with no thought for the future :(
The chief ape like creature isn't concerned as he will probably be pushing up daisies before the main impact of climate change takes hold.
-
It's a disgrace, but you can't impeach a President because you don't like their policies.
True. If only there were a way for the US public to remove a president with bad policies, perhaps some sort of election...
-
Trump's statement on a report about climate change, not of which he has read. :o
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/11/26/politics/donald-trump-climate-change/index.html
-
Trump's statement on a report about climate change, not of which he has read. :o
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/11/26/politics/donald-trump-climate-change/index.html
He does not know the difference between climate and weather. This should not come as a surprise to anyone since to be properly understood this concept requires an IQ in double figures.
-
He does not know the difference between climate and weather. This should not come as a surprise to anyone since to be properly understood this concept requires an IQ in double figures.
True.
-
Seven charts about climate change......
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-46384067
-
The link brings out how beef production is one of the highest contributors to emissions leading to warming.
-
The link brings out how beef production is one of the highest contributors to emissions leading to warming.
30% of the world's cattle are in India.
Does that make India the world's largest cattle based greenhouse emitter?
Should there be some control/culling introduced there?
-
Its about 13% I think....
https://www.drovers.com/article/world-cattle-inventory-ranking-countries-fao
But that's a good point. I am not sure what we can do though. In India killing cows is a great sin. We use them mostly for milk.
-
I downloaded data from the UN to do my own analysis of beef consumption by continent over time; preliminary result here :
https://datastudio.google.com/reporting/1XBG-KkCNd5VhI3ovfDmoixr_UKWJ3QnU/page/MGXd (https://datastudio.google.com/reporting/1XBG-KkCNd5VhI3ovfDmoixr_UKWJ3QnU/page/MGXd)
It shows annual average consumption per head is in decline globally since a peak around 1976. However I haven't yet factored in total population by continent and trends in population by continent. Although the major beef eating countries are declining in consumption, lower income countries are bucking that trend with a steady increase in both consumption per head and total population.
In terms of both calorie and protein yield per hectare, it is far more efficient in terms of food economics to grow crops on the land rather than grass it and put cows on there. In the context of global food security, and also in the context of climate change, deploying cows on your land makes no sense; it is an extravagance that the world cannot continue to afford.
With that in mind I am in process of creating a petition requesting the UK government consider raising a climate change levy on beef and dairy produce. Will post up a link when it is approved and live for anyone who would like to support it.
-
Its about 13% I think....
https://www.drovers.com/article/world-cattle-inventory-ranking-countries-fao
But that's a good point. I am not sure what we can do though. In India killing cows is a great sin. We use them mostly for milk.
That's a 2015 article.
I got my figure from a 2018 up to date one.
So not only does India have the largest population of cattle, it is growing fast enough to have overtaken Brazil in only three years since your figures !
I think the Indian people need to seriously look at their unfettered growing contribution to global cow climate change and start to do something about it before it's too late.
-
In terms of both calorie and protein yield per hectare, it is far more efficient in terms of food economics to grow crops on the land rather than grass it and put cows on there. In the context of global food security, and also in the context of climate change, deploying cows on your land makes no sense; it is an extravagance that the world cannot continue to afford.
Each year, I drive from one of the Channel ports to my French holiday home. Much of the French countryside now is prairie-like expanses of maize, wheat, sorghum and similar crops, grown primarily as cattle food. Stock rearing - as such - occupies a relatively small proportion of farmed land in France. The majority of agricultural activity appears to be growing crops for conversion into cattle food.
I do admit to being a meat eater, but am not voraciously so. It often occurs to me that were some of the land devoted to the production of cattle feed used for food for direct human consumption that we might all have the opportunity to eat a wider and healthier variety of foods.
-
I'm thinking then that another sensible choice would be to switch from cow to sheep and goat dairy.
-
Yep
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/a-kind-of-dark-realism-why-the-climate-change-problem-is-starting-to-look-too-big-to-solve/2018/12/03/378e49e4-e75d-11e8-a939-9469f1166f9d_story.html
-
Yep
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/a-kind-of-dark-realism-why-the-climate-change-problem-is-starting-to-look-too-big-to-solve/2018/12/03/378e49e4-e75d-11e8-a939-9469f1166f9d_story.html
Yeah....it is inevitable.
I have come across some youngsters who don't want to have children because they feel the children could be subjected to suffering and possibly early death.
Our reproductive instincts seem to be getting affected because the illusion of perennial life seems to be disappearing in the face of imminent calamities.
Very sad!
-
I think it is inevitable because we cannot muster the belief and will to tackle it. Witness Mr Macron's climb down in the face of a public backlash against fuel taxes; and yet such measures are just tinkering at the edges of a problem that is vast in scale. I'm arguing with some American guy on Quora who is convinced the climate change issue is all scaremongering by Democrats who are seeking to ruin the American economy. Half of America will oppose action on climate change on party political grounds. By the time sufficient people become sufficiently aware to be able to stomach radical change it will be too late to halt or reverse major disruption and we will be bequeathing a future of unprecedented brutality for our descendants.
-
...
Our reproductive instincts seem to be getting affected because the illusion of perennial life seems to be disappearing in the face of imminent calamities.
...
This is a problem?
-
My Govt petition for a climate levy on beef has just gone live. If you'd care to sign it it is here :
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/233474 (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/233474)
Sorry, Sriram, you need to be a UK citizen to sign.
-
My Govt petition for a climate levy on beef has just gone live. If you'd care to sign it it is here :
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/233474 (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/233474)
Sorry, Sriram, you need to be a UK citizen to sign.
Sriram could start a petition in India to get it's world record cattle numbers down and under control given the amount of contribution they have towards global warming?
-
Sriram could start a petition in India to get its world record cattle numbers down and under control given the amount of contribution they have towards global warming.
It's also one of the world's largest countries, so that it has a very large number of cattle (and people) isn't very surprising. In any case, shifting the blame on to cattle is not helpful: it's industrial emmissions that are the main culprit, not cow-farts.
-
It's also one of the world's largest countries, so that it has a very large number of cattle (and people) isn't very surprising. In any case, shifting the blame on to cattle is not helpful: it's industrial emmissions that are the main culprit, not cow-farts.
Who's shifting the blame?
-
Sriram could start a petition in India to get it's world record cattle numbers down and under control given the amount of contribution they have towards global warming?
To be fair, the Gap report from NewClimate suggests that India is one of only three countries in the world that are exceeding their Paris emissions targets. The vast majority of nations are failing their own targets. The real villains of the piece are China, first and foremost, and the US, both of whom are prioritising economic growth at the expense of environmental considerations.
https://newclimate.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/EmissionGapReport_2018.pdf (https://newclimate.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/EmissionGapReport_2018.pdf)
-
Yeah....and besides cutting emissions we all as individuals can contribute by not using plastics, disposable diapers, hygiene pads, wet wipes, tissues, throw away pens, shaving kits, straws,bottles....and many other such things. Even many electronic items can be repaired and reused instead of going in for new ones.
Maybe taking to a largely veg diet would also help.
-
I don't think that simply blaming the existence of plastics and other materials is really appropriate. These substances exist and they make a contribution to the quality of our everyday life. The meaning and implications of recycling need to be re-examined.
I can't talk about India but the situation that exists in the UK is that there is a lot of talking about recycling but precious little thinking about recycling. Central government expects - places a duty on - local government to recycle waste but (as far as I am aware) apart from setting targets provides no guidelines or principles to be followed by local authorities. Until recently, it would seem, the most frequent practice was to bundle waste up and send it to China. There have been reports that some firms contracted to dispose of waste simply put it on board ship and dumped it at sea. (Can anyone can provide supporting evidence for this?)
What the UK needs is a firm, responsible, overarching recycling policy with recommended practices. I recall hearing someone on the radio a few weeks ago talking about taking plastic waste and rendering it back into its original hydrocarbon state - thereby making it available for forming into new plastic products.
Recycling is an area with precious little joined-up thinking.
-
Colour me unsurprised
https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/science-environment-46496967?fbclid=IwAR2fPFbJ6s6O_ldOBFN3CCe_o6Jknvso4oh63OvfI3x7MJFIzZ_KTsCVIm8
-
Hi everyone,
Here is an article about this. Climate change has finally 'hit home' for many in the developed world...
......
I don't know if the article mentions the elephant in the room, which is the increasing global population. People have to maintain a body temperature of 37 degrees, and so they will have to use fuel. They will also emit greenhouse gases. They have to cut down trees to plant crops, and so on. So there is no point in trying to change peoples' lifestyles without including a global population control measure.
Assuming that most people would oppose this, I think the eventual outcome will be that natural disasters may eventually cause the population to plateau out.
-
Climate change is getting worse than earlier thought.
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/25/opinions/climate-change-getting-worse-intl/index.html
***********
To get a full grasp of climate change, you need to take a geological perspective. Wind the clock back all the way through human history, past the Romans and through the Stone Age, to the time before modern humans evolved, and our ape ancestors roamed in Africa.
Roughly three million years ago, in an epoch called the Pliocene, was the last time carbon dioxide levels were as high in the atmosphere as they are now. In other words, today's CO2 concentrations -- at about 410 parts per million -- are higher than at any time during the existence of Homo sapiens.
But it's the rate of change that is really off the charts, even geologically. Humans are now transferring 10 billion tonnes of carbon from the earth's crust -- in the form of combusted coal, oil and gas -- into the atmosphere each year.
When I wrote Six Degrees back in 2007 I felt that there was at least an odds-on chance of stabilizing global temperatures at or below 2 degrees Celsius, the policy target that was later agreed by world leaders at the Paris climate conference in 2015.
This now looks deluded. Achieving the two-degrees target would require the whole world to cut its net carbon emissions to zero by mid-century, and to go carbon-negative -- somehow hoovering up hundreds of billions of tonnes of extra carbon dioxide using technology yet to be invented -- from the atmosphere for decades thereafter.
In the real world, the opposite is happening. Emissions reached a new record last year, dragging us ever closer to the worst-case scenarios employed by climate models, which yield four degrees or more by the end of this century.
There is no known geological precedent, for at least the last half-billion years of the history of life on earth, for climate change of the magnitude now projected this century to take place over such a short period of time.
To think that young people alive today will experience all of this within their lifetimes is an extraordinary thought indeed.
***********
-
The link brings out how beef production is one of the highest contributors to emissions leading to warming.
No it doesn’t the chart only compares beef with other forms of food production.
-
I downloaded data from the UN to do my own analysis of beef consumption by continent over time; preliminary result here :
https://datastudio.google.com/reporting/1XBG-KkCNd5VhI3ovfDmoixr_UKWJ3QnU/page/MGXd (https://datastudio.google.com/reporting/1XBG-KkCNd5VhI3ovfDmoixr_UKWJ3QnU/page/MGXd)
It shows annual average consumption per head is in decline globally since a peak around 1976. However I haven't yet factored in total population by continent and trends in population by continent. Although the major beef eating countries are declining in consumption, lower income countries are bucking that trend with a steady increase in both consumption per head and total population.
In terms of both calorie and protein yield per hectare, it is far more efficient in terms of food economics to grow crops on the land rather than grass it and put cows on there. In the context of global food security, and also in the context of climate change, deploying cows on your land makes no sense; it is an extravagance that the world cannot continue to afford.
With that in mind I am in process of creating a petition requesting the UK government consider raising a climate change levy on beef and dairy produce. Will post up a link when it is approved and live for anyone who would like to support it.
Not all agricultural land is suitable for arable.
-
Not all agricultural land is suitable for arable.
No doubt. Some would be suitable. In the context of the UK I would imagine most pastureland given over to dairy and beef herds could be turned into arable land and it could also be reverted to forestry to act as a natural carbon sink. With sheep farming the equations would be different, hill farmers can put sheep on bleak uplands and produce wool and lamb where growing crops would be near impossible. That is land that could be reforested also on the other hand. All those sheep turn the land into a barren desert in ecological terms and there would be value in terms of biodiversity as well as climate mitigation. The UK is one of the most deforested lands in Europe, around 12% forest cover if I remember correctly, which is well short of what would be 'natural' (100%)
-
Thoughtful and thought-provoking piece here:
https://tinyurl.com/A-Burning-World
-
As John Seymour, the self-sufficiency doyen, once pointed out, arguments about livestock taking up more land than crops ignore the stiff that comes out of the other end of livestock, which is of great value in growing crops.
-
Thoughtful and thought-provoking piece here:
https://tinyurl.com/A-Burning-World
A depressing read and I don't really share the author's optimistic end note, I am thinking that is merely a continuation of his delusion. We can see in Brexit and in Hungary and in Trump's America signs of how we react to the stresses of immigration and yet the numbers of current refugees are negligible compared to projections for mid-century and later by which time many densely populated lands will be lost to the ocean. Part of our shared delusion is our faith in technology and our faith in humanity, that we can do the right thing, as embodied by internationlist institutions like the League of Nations and the United Nations all very noble and aspirational but in the post war period we could afford nobility and internationalist aspirations. When are are beseiged by overwhelmuing numbers our humanitarian aspirations will go out the window and the cooler richer western nations will resort to ever more desperate measures to keep out the poor and the desparate. I don't think we can avoid this; despite all the rhetoric around greening our economies our CO2 levels are still rising. We are incapable of rising to this challenge and acting as one.
-
Do you think that, at this stage, any changes we make in our life styles or even Govt. policy changes are going to make any difference? I don't think so.
We should plant trees and stop destroying the forests, and teach kids about why it's necessary to do so.
-
To get a full grasp of climate change, you need to take a geological perspective. Wind the clock back all the way through human history, past the Romans and through the Stone Age, to the time before modern humans evolved, and our ape ancestors roamed in Africa.
If our ancestors had been apes I doubt we would be typing on this forum.
-
If our ancestors had been apes I doubt we would be typing on this forum.
Why?
-
Why?
Because we would be apes, which can't read and write or type.
-
Because we would be apes, which can't read and write or type.
Apes can do a lot more than you think they can, and in time may be able to do what we do today.
When the human ape came into existence about 200,000 years it wouldn't have been more evolved than some of the brightest apes today.
-
Did they give you the all clear with driving LR?
-
Did they give you the all clear with driving LR?
Yes, but what has that got to do what we have just been discussing?
-
Because we would be apes, which can't read and write or type.
We are apes, Spud.
Hominidae (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hominidae)
The Hominidae (/hɒˈmɪnɪdiː/), whose members are known as great apes or hominids, are a taxonomic family of primates that includes eight extant species in four genera: Pongo, the Bornean, Sumatran and Tapanuli orangutan; Gorilla, the eastern and western gorilla; Pan, the common chimpanzee and the bonobo; and Homo, which includes modern humans and its extinct relatives (e.g., the Neanderthal), and ancestors, such as Homo erectus.
-
Because we would be apes, which can't read and write or type.
The species of ape called Homo sapiens can learn to read, write and type. Please take your creationist nonsense and shove it up your arse.
-
Because we would be apes, which can't read and write or type.
Well I'm an ape, Spud, and I can read, write and type - moreover, you too are an ape!
-
Yes, but what has that got to do what we have just been discussing?
Just thought I'd ask, as I saw you wrote about it elsewhere. Glad to hear that.
-
Apes can do a lot more than you think they can, and in time may be able to do what we do today.
When the human ape came into existence about 200,000 years it wouldn't have been more evolved than some of the brightest apes today.
A snesible post from LR! Pass the smelling salts!
-
A snesible post from LR! Pass the smelling salts!
I will come and wipe your fevered brow. ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Yet more on the burning of our world:
https://tinyurl.com/Tasmania-burns
-
Yet more on the burning of our world:
https://tinyurl.com/Tasmania-burns
Extremely concerning, yet there are still climate change deniers like Trump! :o
-
As if the news from climate science wasn't bad enough, according to this report, insects are declining globally at a rate of 2.5% per annum, a truly shocking statistic if it is correct. At this rate we will see an irreversible catastrophic collapse of all natural ecosystems by the end of the century leading to the inevitable mass starvation of billions of people. I cannot begin to process the sheer scale of this.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/feb/10/plummeting-insect-numbers-threaten-collapse-of-nature (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/feb/10/plummeting-insect-numbers-threaten-collapse-of-nature)
-
.... and here ..... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-47203344
-
Anyone wanting to raise their voice, here is a petition you can sign "Declare a national climate emergency now!" :
https://www.change.org/p/uk-government-declare-a-national-climate-emergency-now?cs_tk=Atu-cFgOfajxKUtDaFwAAXicyyvNyQEABF8BvLGtb5Mr3lfUVoFZ89daWIY%3D&utm_campaign=6106a0dc513f42238634df358939e61e&utm_medium=email&utm_source=petition_update&utm_term=cs (https://www.change.org/p/uk-government-declare-a-national-climate-emergency-now?cs_tk=Atu-cFgOfajxKUtDaFwAAXicyyvNyQEABF8BvLGtb5Mr3lfUVoFZ89daWIY%3D&utm_campaign=6106a0dc513f42238634df358939e61e&utm_medium=email&utm_source=petition_update&utm_term=cs)
-
Are we on the road to civilization collapse.....? The article analyses earlier civilizations and other factors besides climate.
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20190218-are-we-on-the-road-to-civilisation-collapse
-
Check this....
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20190220-how-artificially-brightened-clouds-could-stop-climate-change
Haven't we done enough damage already? These 'solutions' will have some other repercussions that we are incapable of foreseeing....
-
An article echoing my own thoughts on the recent spell of warm weather. It's just wrong weather.
http://tinyurl.com/Febwarmth
-
Whilst this warm weather is pleasant it is scary. The 'beast from the east' in 2018, was cold and disruptive, but at least it is what one expects in winter.
-
https://www.bbc.com/ideas/videos/are-you-suffering-from-climate-change-anxiety/p073zgqd
-
Greenland is melting even faster than experts thought, study finds....
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/04/22/world/greenland-sea-level-rise-scn/index.html
-
Oh dear, more bad.
According to Nasa data, the planet is experiencing net ice loss at the rate of four hundred thousand million tons per year; this news on Greenland will probably see Nasa revising their data upwards.
-
Thoughtful piece by William Hague in The Telegraph :
https://premium.telegraph.co.uk/newsletter/article4/the-time-for-denial-is-over-conservatives-have-to-take-the-climate-crisis-seriously/?WT.mc_id=e_DM997467&WT.tsrc=email&etype=Edi_Edi_New_Reg&utm_source=email&utm_medium=Edi_Edi_New_Reg_2019_04_25&utm_campaign=DM997467 (https://premium.telegraph.co.uk/newsletter/article4/the-time-for-denial-is-over-conservatives-have-to-take-the-climate-crisis-seriously/?WT.mc_id=e_DM997467&WT.tsrc=email&etype=Edi_Edi_New_Reg&utm_source=email&utm_medium=Edi_Edi_New_Reg_2019_04_25&utm_campaign=DM997467)
-
I don't think anything we do now will make any difference..! Things have gone too far. And we don't really understand the entire system and the subtle consequences of whatever we do.
People were earlier concerned about a possible 1.5 to 2 degrees rise in temp. Now I think that is a foregone conclusion.
-
I don't think anything we do now will make any difference..! Things have gone too far. And we don't really understand the entire system and the subtle consequences of whatever we do.
People were earlier concerned about a possible 1.5 to 2 degrees rise in temp. Now I think that is a foregone conclusion.
I hope you are wrong, but fear you might be right. :o
-
Here is something about recycling of plastics...
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/04/26/asia/malaysia-plastic-recycle-intl/index.html
American plastic waste sent to China/Malaysia. 'Managing' other peoples plastic waste.
::) ::) :(
-
Here is something about recycling of plastics...
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/04/26/asia/malaysia-plastic-recycle-intl/index.html
American plastic waste sent to China/Malaysia. 'Managing' other peoples plastic waste.
::) ::) :(
Let’s be fair, it’s not just American waste. A lot of Western countries are doing it.
-
Here is something about recycling of plastics...
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/04/26/asia/malaysia-plastic-recycle-intl/index.html
American plastic waste sent to China/Malaysia. 'Managing' other peoples plastic waste.
::) ::) :(
Your point?
-
On recycling waste....
https://www.bbc.com/
-
http://www.bbc.com/capital/story/20190502-how-global-warming-has-made-the-rich-richer
-
Relax, all is in hand ....... https://tinyurl.com/y5hcz489
-
Relax, all is in hand ....... https://tinyurl.com/y5hcz489
I reckon Trump is an alien, who has settled on this planet.
-
I reckon Trump is an alien, who has settled on this planet.
Which type do you think he is? ...... "Dr Chi believes that there are four types of aliens: small; tall and bold; aliens with scales and snake eyes; and finally, insect-like aliens. The latter of these seems to be the highest in the hierarchy, he said, and gives orders to the lower ranks. "
-
Which type do you think he is? ...... "Dr Chi believes that there are four types of aliens: small; tall and bold; aliens with scales and snake eyes; and finally, insect-like aliens. The latter of these seems to be the highest in the hierarchy, he said, and gives orders to the lower ranks. "
Snake eyes is the closest description of Trump!
-
Lecture on the inevitability of civilization collapse by Sidney Smith, disturbing, thought provoking :
https://youtu.be/5WPB2u8EzL8 (https://youtu.be/5WPB2u8EzL8)
-
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/06/05/health/microplastic-particle-ingestion-study/index.html
*********
Every day we are ingesting tiny, often microscopic pieces of plastic -- "microplastics" -- with our food, beverages and with the very air we breathe.
Americans eat, drink and breathe between 74,000 and 121,000 microplastic particles each year depending on their age and sex, new research suggests.
Those who exclusively drink bottled water rather than tap water can add up to 90,000 plastic particles to their estimated annual total, according to the study published Wednesday in the journal Environmental Science & Technology.
The full impact on our health isn't known. Research shows some particles are small enough to enter our tissues, where they can trigger an immune reaction, or release toxic substances and pollutants absorbed from the environment, including heavy metals.
**********
-
Two records broken for CO2 levels in May according to Scripps : the highest level ever recorded - 415.26ppm and the highest ever monthly average 414.8 ppm for the month of May overall.
https://www.inverse.com/article/56409-keeling-curve-co2-concentration-breaks-a-very-bad-record?link_uid=11&utm_campaign=inverse-daily-2019-06-05&utm_medium=inverse&utm_source=newsletter (https://www.inverse.com/article/56409-keeling-curve-co2-concentration-breaks-a-very-bad-record?link_uid=11&utm_campaign=inverse-daily-2019-06-05&utm_medium=inverse&utm_source=newsletter)
This is not promising for our ambitions on carbon emissions - rather than falling, in line with Paris commitments, the rise in atmospheric carbon loading is accelerating. Based on these trajectories we are heading into apocalyptic territory by mid to the latter half of the century. The young are right to be outraged by the indifference of the adults.
Here a nice animation from Scripps of CO2 over time, puts it into geological timescales
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z43FQCSg4Ow&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z43FQCSg4Ow&feature=youtu.be)
-
This is probably the only subject that needs to be discussed with any degree of urgency. Catastrophe is now imminent and nothing else really matters.
I don't think anything we do now can possibly reverse the trend.
Unfortunately it is human self importance, greed and illusion of control that is responsible for this situation. Science and technology have been misused.
-
Science and technology have been misused.
Or religion, you know:
As for you, be fruitful and increase in number; multiply on the earth and increase upon it."
And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
-
I suspect that if there is a way out of this, the only real chance is some technological development.
-
Nuclear fusion might be the saviour we need, but we just aren't quite there yet, and probably won't achieve it in the timescales we have. The last IPCC report talked about a window of 12 years to reduce emissions before 2C gets locked in, but it will probably be 15 years before fusion starts to come on stream.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/mar/09/nuclear-fusion-on-brink-of-being-realised-say-mit-scientists (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/mar/09/nuclear-fusion-on-brink-of-being-realised-say-mit-scientists)
-
Meanwhile what seem to me fairly pointless targets for zero emissions are argued to be too aggressive! Instead of 6 govts down the line we should be talking about it being done by the end of the next one. And yes, that is aggressive, and we may not meet it but it's in better line with the needs. After all when Kennedy talked of putting man on the moon he didn't say by the end of the 80s.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/cutting-uk-emissions-to-net-zero-would-cost-%c2%a31tn-says-hammond/ar-AACtJzk
-
and meanwhile the govt proposes to have us all driving electric cars, seemingly quite obliviously to the fact that there is nowhere near enough cobalt and lithium on the planet to convert all vehicles to run on batteries.
And it doesn't seem to have occurred to anyone in power that these scarce resources are being squandered on trivial uses. if we are serious about electric vehicles we need to be thinking about banning a plethora of battery powered devices :
http://consciousnessofsheep.co.uk/2019/04/11/jevons-paradox-is-alive-well-and-in-my-local-diy-store/ (http://consciousnessofsheep.co.uk/2019/04/11/jevons-paradox-is-alive-well-and-in-my-local-diy-store/)
-
It seems obvious to me that much could be done to avert collapse and catastrophe. Technology could help but the fundamental obstacles are political and economic.
So it goes.
...
As for you, be fruitful and increase in number; multiply on the earth and increase upon it."
And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
Those ideas were probably fine in 1000 BCE just no use now, from where we are.
-
It seems obvious to me that much could be done to avert collapse and catastrophe. Technology could help but the fundamental obstacles are political and economic.
So it goes.
Those ideas were probably fine in 1000 BCE just no use now, from where we are.
I don't disagree but even if we get the political will it will still need a technological solution. Not sure there is a real economic issue, that is different from the political.
-
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-48964736
***********
Do you remember the good old days when we had "12 years to save the planet"?
Now it seems, there's a growing consensus that the next 18 months will be critical in dealing with the global heating crisis, among other environmental challenges.
Last year, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reported that to keep the rise in global temperatures below 1.5C this century, emissions of carbon dioxide would have to be cut by 45% by 2030.
But today, observers recognise that the decisive, political steps to enable the cuts in carbon to take place will have to happen before the end of next year.
***********
-
Things that aren't going to happen - 'decisive, political steps to enable the cuts in carbon'.
-
https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/watch-greenland-ice-sheet-turns-into-10-billion-tonnes-of-water-in-hours-2079180?pfrom=home-topstories
*************
An extraordinary melt event that began earlier this week continues on Thursday on the Greenland ice sheet, and there are signs that about 60% of the expansive ice cover has seen detectable surface melting, including at higher elevations that only rarely see temperatures climb above freezing.
July 31 was the biggest melt day since at least 2012, with about 60% of the ice sheet seeing at least 1 millimeter of melt at the surface, and more than 10 billion tons of ice lost to the ocean from surface melt, according to data from the Polar Portal, a website run by Danish polar research institutions, and the National Snow and Ice Data Center. Thursday could be another significant melt day,.....
"Like 2012, this melt event reached the highest elevations of the ice sheet, which is highly unusual," says Thomas Mote,
Studies have shown that ice melt periods like the one seen in 2012 typically occur about every 250 years, so the fact that another one is taking place only a few years later could be a sign of how climate change is upping the odds of such events.
*************
-
I am reminded of this passage from Mark 4 37:40 -
A furious squall came up, and the waves broke over the boat, so that it was nearly swamped. Jesus was in the stern, sleeping on a cushion. The disciples woke him and said to him, “Teacher, don’t you care if we drown?”
He got up, rebuked the wind and said to the waves, “Quiet! Be still!” Then the wind died down and it was completely calm.
He said to his disciples, “Why are you so afraid? Do you still have no faith?”
There is evidence that the sun is cooling slightly.
https://www.livescience.com/61716-sun-cooling-global-warming.html
I put my faith in the power of the Creator to help counter the follies of mankind.
-
Alan.....I am a believer in God too...but a very different kind of 'God'.
If Jesus could stop wind and rain....why couldn't he stop his own crucifixion? All the persecution of Christians, crucifixions and beheadings that followed later. All the centuries of wars and battles.
The answer could be that it is all God's Will and his higher wisdom that we cannot understand. Maybe so. In that case, it could be God's will that Climate Change should happen, sea levels should rise and many should perish.
As far as God is concerned, death and destruction do not seem to be major events at all (unlike for us). All a natural part of life's cycle.
-
I am reminded of this passage from Mark 4 37:40 -
A furious squall came up, and the waves broke over the boat, so that it was nearly swamped. Jesus was in the stern, sleeping on a cushion. The disciples woke him and said to him, “Teacher, don’t you care if we drown?”
He got up, rebuked the wind and said to the waves, “Quiet! Be still!” Then the wind died down and it was completely calm.
He said to his disciples, “Why are you so afraid? Do you still have no faith?”
There is evidence that the sun is cooling slightly.
https://www.livescience.com/61716-sun-cooling-global-warming.html
I put my faith in the power of the Creator to help counter the follies of mankind.
The 'furious squall' was of course a natural event for which the fishermen of the story bore no responsibility. The current heating of the planet and the evisceration of much of the natural world that lies beneath and supports human civilisation is a mess of our own making and it is us who need to fix it.
A slight diminution in long term solar output will not save us from our folly. Indeed we are currently at a low point in the Sun's more well known eleven year cycle but you'd hardly guess that to be the case given that the last four years have been the hottest since instrumental records began. The article linked makes that clear, a long term diminution at best might reduce global mean temperatures by around 0.5C for some of this century after which the normal levels of solar output would return.
It is our shortsightedness and blindness to science that has allowed this problem to grow until it is now almost beyond any political will we can muster. Jesus isn't going to come back and save us from our folly, such fantasy thinking is at the extreme end of the human stupidity spectrum. Denial of reality has gotten us into this mess and more of the same will not get us out.
-
I am reminded of this passage from Mark 4 37:40 -
A furious squall came up, and the waves broke over the boat, so that it was nearly swamped. Jesus was in the stern, sleeping on a cushion. The disciples woke him and said to him, “Teacher, don’t you care if we drown?”
He got up, rebuked the wind and said to the waves, “Quiet! Be still!” Then the wind died down and it was completely calm.
He said to his disciples, “Why are you so afraid? Do you still have no faith?”
There is evidence that the sun is cooling slightly.
https://www.livescience.com/61716-sun-cooling-global-warming.html
I put my faith in the power of the Creator to help counter the follies of mankind.
Jaw-dropping. When it comes to natural disasters and terrible diseases that kill innocent children, the religionists make up all sorts of silly reasons why it isn't god's fault, but as soon as anything is perceived as being positive, that's equally out of human hands, then it's "goddidit!"
It would be hilarious if it wasn't so sad to see human minds so crippled by irrational faith...
-
Alan.....I am a believer in God too...but a very different kind of 'God'.
If Jesus could stop wind and rain....why couldn't he stop his own crucifixion? All the persecution of Christians, crucifixions and beheadings that followed later. All the centuries of wars and battles.
The answer could be that it is all God's Will and his higher wisdom that we cannot understand. Maybe so. In that case, it could be God's will that Climate Change should happen, sea levels should rise and many should perish.
As far as God is concerned, death and destruction do not seem to be major events at all (unlike for us). All a natural part of life's cycle.
Faith is the key to dealing with such problems.
As aptly recorded by Julian of Norwich amid the turmoil of the 14th century:
In her thirteenth showing, Julian receives a comforting answer to a question that has long troubled her:
“In my folly, before this time I often wondered why, by the great foreseeing wisdom of God, the onset of sin was not prevented: for then, I thought, all should have been well. This impulse [of thought] was much to be avoided, but nevertheless I mourned and sorrowed because of it, without reason and discretion.
“But Jesus, who in this vision informed me of all that is needed by me, answered with these words and said: ‘It was necessary that there should be sin; but all shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of thing shall be well.'
(from Revelations of Divine Love)
-
Alan,
In the context of personal anxieties and emotional issues, faith can be very useful. I know that. But that is not what we are talking about in this thread.
In the context of Climate change how do you think personal faith is going to help?
-
Alan,
In the context of personal anxieties and emotional issues, faith can be very useful. I know that. But that is not what we are talking about in this thread.
In the context of Climate change how do you think personal faith is going to help?
Jesus clearly states in the Gospel records that He found it difficult to work miracles amongst people who had little faith. Faith is the key which unlocks God's miraculous power. My own personal experiences of putting my faith and trust in God has indeed produced results far beyond my expectations. Sometimes the answers come through other people. Sometimes it can be seen as divine intervention. If climate change does bring about catastrophe, I will have to ponder what would have happened if more people had faith in God.
“Why are you so afraid? Do you still have no faith?” Mark 4:40
-
A vast majority of the people in this world believe in God....maybe not in Jesus. Since God is one anyway...it should not matter by what name he is addressed. Which means that a majority do have faith in Him.
But we know that all events are decided by earlier events and/or through external intervention (what scientists call random). Which means that God is deciding all events however good or bad they may appear to us....climate change included.
-
Faith is the key to dealing with such problems.
So tell us how faith is going to remove excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere within the necessary timeframe.
-
A vast majority of the people in this world believe in God...
No, they do not. People believe in all sorts of different and incompatible gods. Whichever god(s) you believe in, most people in the world think you are wrong.
...maybe not in Jesus. Since God is one anyway...it should not matter by what name he is addressed. Which means that a majority do have faith in Him.
Unmitigated drivel. It's not a matter of names, the gods people believe in are different concepts.
But we know that all events are decided by earlier events and/or through external intervention (what scientists call random).
::)
-
Jesus clearly states in the Gospel records that He found it difficult to work miracles amongst people who had little faith. Faith is the key which unlocks God's miraculous power.
So, all in all, 'miracles' work best when the intended audience are already biased in favour of the notion of 'miracles' and are credulous enough to buy into the 'miracle' narrative offered - the so-called 'Miracle of the Sun' in Portugal in 1917 being an example.
My own personal experiences of putting my faith and trust in God has indeed produced results far beyond my expectations. Sometimes the answers come through other people. Sometimes it can be seen as divine intervention. If climate change does bring about catastrophe, I will have to ponder what would have happened if more people had faith in God.
Perhaps if 'God' were to intervene, such as by announcing it would reduce the CO2 in the atmosphere by a specified amount in less than hour on a specific date, and then it does so, which can easily be checked, there would be grounds to take 'God' seriously - until then!
-
Jesus clearly states in the Gospel records that He found it difficult to work miracles amongst people who had little faith. Faith is the key which unlocks God's miraculous power. My own personal experiences of putting my faith and trust in God has indeed produced results far beyond my expectations. Sometimes the answers come through other people. Sometimes it can be seen as divine intervention. If climate change does bring about catastrophe, I will have to ponder what would have happened if more people had faith in God.
“Why are you so afraid? Do you still have no faith?” Mark 4:40
What on earth has religion got to do with climate change, a manmade creation?
-
So tell us how faith is going to remove excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere within the necessary timeframe.
God's will can intervene in many ways - as can human will.
Despite valiant efforts which can be seen to be too little too late, human folly continues to dominate and produce ever increasing pollution.
It will indeed take a miracle to save this precious planet.
So let us pray …
-
So let us pray …
Alternatively, we do something that might actually help, like listen to, and act on the science.
-
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20190730-the-animals-that-will-survive-climate-change
**********
With one in every four species facing extinction, which animals are the best equipped to survive the climate crisis?
“I don’t think it will be the humans. I think we’ll go quite early on,” says Julie Gray....
**********
-
So tell us how faith is going to remove excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere within the necessary timeframe.
God's will can intervene in many ways - as can human will.
Despite valiant efforts which can be seen to be too little too late, human folly continues to dominate and produce ever increasing pollution.
It will indeed take a miracle to save this precious planet.
So let us pray …
So, nothing but vague assertions then. Face it, God isn't going to remove a single molecule of CO2 from the atmosphere.
I don't see any evidence of divine intervention through faith stopping the problem building up in the first place. Is it the case that people of faith have uniformly been refusing to eat red meat or drive cars or take flights over the last 50 years ? Somehow God failed to communicate the perils of such a lifestyle to his faithful despite all their devotions. No, it is science that has alerted us to this, not God; faith will not get us out of this mess; science might help.
-
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20190730-the-animals-that-will-survive-climate-change
**********
With one in every four species facing extinction, which animals are the best equipped to survive the climate crisis?
“I don’t think it will be the humans. I think we’ll go quite early on,” says Julie Gray....
**********
The god of the cockroaches would seem to be the powerful one.
-
Faith is the key to dealing with such problems.
As aptly recorded by Julian of Norwich amid the turmoil of the 14th century:
In her thirteenth showing, Julian receives a comforting answer to a question that has long troubled her:
“In my folly, before this time I often wondered why, by the great foreseeing wisdom of God, the onset of sin was not prevented: for then, I thought, all should have been well. This impulse [of thought] was much to be avoided, but nevertheless I mourned and sorrowed because of it, without reason and discretion.
“But Jesus, who in this vision informed me of all that is needed by me, answered with these words and said: ‘It was necessary that there should be sin; but all shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of thing shall be well.'
(from Revelations of Divine Love)
Julian of Norwich was easily pleased, wasn't she? What a pity Jesus didn't take the opportunity to answer with something convincing that his apologists could have used in debates with non-believers in centuries to come.
As for the climate, we've known about the dangers for decades and chosen to disregard them in favour of comforting nonsense and self-indulgence. Seems to be the default as far as humans are concerned.
-
Faith is the key to dealing with such problems.
As aptly recorded by Julian of Norwich amid the turmoil of the 14th century:
In her thirteenth showing, Julian receives a comforting answer to a question that has long troubled her:
“In my folly, before this time I often wondered why, by the great foreseeing wisdom of God, the onset of sin was not prevented: for then, I thought, all should have been well. This impulse [of thought] was much to be avoided, but nevertheless I mourned and sorrowed because of it, without reason and discretion.
“But Jesus, who in this vision informed me of all that is needed by me, answered with these words and said: ‘It was necessary that there should be sin; but all shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of thing shall be well.'
(from Revelations of Divine Love)
So Jesus thinks the various people shot in the US in the last couple of days are collateral damage to his plan. Jesus is a cunt.
-
God's will can intervene in many ways - as can human will.
Despite valiant efforts which can be seen to be too little too late, human folly continues to dominate and produce ever increasing pollution.
It will indeed take a miracle to save this precious planet.
So let us pray …
Prayer isn't going to save this planet, the sky fairy doesn't give a monkey's if it exists. It will probably get an erection when witnessing the suffering climate change will cause. ;D
-
So tell us how faith is going to remove excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere within the necessary timeframe.
So, nothing but vague assertions then. Face it, God isn't going to remove a single molecule of CO2 from the atmosphere.
I don't see any evidence of divine intervention through faith stopping the problem building up in the first place. Is it the case that people of faith have uniformly been refusing to eat red meat or drive cars or take flights over the last 50 years ? Somehow God failed to communicate the perils of such a lifestyle to his faithful despite all their devotions. No, it is science that has alerted us to this, not God; faith will not get us out of this mess; science might help.
God can give wisdom to scientists and people in charge. Apparently though the solution is quite straightforward: plant billions of trees!
-
God can give wisdom to scientists and people in charge. Apparently though the solution is quite straightforward: plant billions of trees!
Humans are much wiser than the Biblical god character.
-
God can give wisdom to scientists and people in charge.
And yet, it seems, he chooses not to?
Apparently though the solution is quite straightforward: plant billions of trees!
There is no single solution - planting trees is merely delaying the inevitable if we don't change the manner in which we consume a range of limited resources.
O.
-
God can give wisdom to scientists and people in charge. Apparently though the solution is quite straightforward: plant billions of trees!
Bringing God into it is merely an abdication of our own responsibility. If there is a God and he can solve the problem by imparting wisdom then why has he not been doing so already ?
It is scientists (who in the main aren't particularly religious) that have alerted us to the climate change problem whereas it is some faith groups, particularly some American evangelicals, that have been among the most active in the climate denial industry concentrating their efforts on stamping out support for green initiatives.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0096340215599789 (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0096340215599789)
God has done nothing to prevent this problem growing in size and God will do nothing to help now. Invoking God is a head in the sand approach to policy making, an appeal to ignorance, a symptom of a more broad tendency to reality denial when what we need most of all is to man up and face reality head on without recourse to fantasy beliefs.
-
Bringing God into it is merely an abdication of our own responsibility. If there is a God and he can solve the problem by imparting wisdom then why has he not been doing so already ?
It is scientists (who in the main aren't particularly religious) that have alerted us to the climate change problem whereas it is some faith groups, particularly some American evangelicals, that have been among the most active in the climate denial industry concentrating their efforts on stamping out support for green initiatives.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0096340215599789 (http://www.religionethics.co.uk/doi/pdf/10.1177/0096340215599789)
God has done nothing to prevent this problem growing in size and God will do nothing to help now. Invoking God is a head in the sand approach to policy making, an appeal to ignorance, a symptom of a more broad tendency to reality denial when what we need most of all is to man up and face reality head on without recourse to fantasy beliefs.
Good post.
-
LR,
I agree about recourse to fantasy beliefs, which do more harm than good. The belief that God gave stewardship of the earth to mankind is consistent with your point about our being responsible for limiting or stopping climate change, however. That would include stopping destruction of forests, or planting new ones, or limiting family size and using resources carefully.
-
LR,
I agree about recourse to fantasy beliefs, which do more harm than good. The belief that God gave stewardship of the earth to mankind is consistent with your point about our being responsible for limiting or stopping climate change, however. That would include stopping destruction of forests, or planting new ones, or limiting family size and using resources carefully.
There is no evidence god exists let alone is responsible for the things you wish to attribute to it.
-
Why have we gotten into an elaborate discussion about God on a Climate Change thread....?! God help us..!
-
Why have we gotten into an elaborate discussion about God on a Climate Change thread....?! God help us..!
It wouldn't be R&E if threads didn't go off topic pretty swiftly. ;D
-
There is no evidence god exists let alone is responsible for the things you wish to attribute to it.
There is evidence, but it seems you want to know more than it's possible to know, as a creature, that is, where did God come from, and so you dismiss the evidence.
-
There is evidence, but it seems you want to know more than it's possible to know, as a creature, that is, where did God come from, and so you dismiss the evidence.
Where is this evidence? Remember evidence for something is some objective fact that would be consistent with your hypothesis (that your particular god exists) and not compatible with other hypotheses.
-
Where is this evidence? Remember evidence for something is some objective fact that would be consistent with your hypothesis (that your particular god exists) and not compatible with other hypotheses.
Hi Stranger, here's the way I see it:
Creation points to a creator. A flint house in Norfolk must have been once a disorderly pile of stones. They couldn't form a house unless moved into position by a human. In the same way, the first tree must, we would expect, have been formed from the elements of which it consisted. It couldn't form by accident. Trees did not evolve from lower plants.
We can't, however, see the creator of that tree. But Jesus once spoke to a tree and it withered. He also healed disease, and calmed storms, by speaking to them.
So we have eyewitness evidence that the order in the universe came through some kind of speech.
Hope that makes sense.
-
Creation points to a creator.
Begging the question from the get-go and failing the first thing I said about evidence. Nobody disputes the existence of "creation", i.e. the universe - it is fully consistent with any story you want to make up about it.
A flint house in Norfolk must have been once a disorderly pile of stones. They couldn't form a house unless moved into position by a human. In the same way, the first tree must, we would expect, have been formed from the elements of which it consisted. It couldn't form by accident. Trees did not evolve from lower plants.
We have copious evidence for how life evolved - denying it is about as sensible as claiming the Earth is flat.
We can't, however, see the creator of that tree. But Jesus once spoke to a tree and it withered. He also healed disease, and calmed storms, by speaking to them.
These are just a stories from an incoherent, often contradictory, book of myths.
So we have eyewitness evidence that the order in the universe came through some kind of speech.
No, we don't.
-
Creation points to a creator.
And all you need, therefore, is to demonstrate creation instead of, say, mere existence.
A flint house in Norfolk must have been once a disorderly pile of stones.
Technically, not necessarily, but for the purposes of this, OK.
They couldn't form a house unless moved into position by a human.
They could, theoretically, though you'd need a few goes at it. Of course, without a human, why would you need a house?
In the same way, the first tree must, we would expect, have been formed from the elements of which it consisted.
By a slightly earlier tree-like organism, but yes.
It couldn't form by accident.
No-one has said that it did. The theory of evolution is not a random process, it's a natural selection amongst spontaneous variation.
Trees did not evolve from lower plants.
They didn't? You've a paper that conclusively undermines almost two centuries of solid evidence in support of the currently understood Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection? Citation required, methinks...
We can't, however, see the creator of that tree.
There are a number of possible explanations for that, we might hold to different subsets of those possibilities.
But Jesus once spoke to a tree and it withered.
So we can't accept two hundred years of gradually more and more refined scientific enquiry into evolutionary biology, ancestral DNA analysis and the like to accept the conventional wisdom of the Theory of Evolution as an explanation for the OBSERVED PHENOMENON THAT IS EVOLUTION, but we should accept the Big Boy's Book of Jewish Bed-Time Stories' account of the magic plant-unwhisperer?
He also healed disease, and calmed storms, by speaking to them.
But then Bagpuss went to sleep, right, and when Bagpuss goes to sleep, all critical thinking has to go to sleep, too...
So we have eyewitness evidence that the order in the universe came through some kind of speech.
So even forgoing the fact that the testimony you're relying on isn't reliably eye-witness accounts, and even forgoing the fact that eye-witness testimony is notoriously unreliable, and even forgoing the multitude of selective bouts of editing by vested interests that have been undertaken on those accounts, and even forgoing the poetic translations that have been perpetrated on those edited accounts, and even forgoing the cultural differences that mean there are some concepts within the original that have no categoric equivalents in reality modern Western culture...
... it does not follow that because Jesus spoke to a tree and caused it wither, therefore Creation was conducted by way of verbal instruction. If nothing else, prior to the creation of everything, there was nothing to say any words, and no medium for those words to be conveyed through.
Hope that makes sense.
Hope is all you got, because sense went on holiday before you started.
O.
-
"Begging the question from the get-go"
Nope, I meant 'creation' in the sense of 'that which exists'.
-
According to Jonathan Franzen writing in the New Yorker, we are delusional to imagine we can stop or mitigate climate change; we should get real about it and focus on post-apocalypse planning instead
https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/what-if-we-stopped-pretending (https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/what-if-we-stopped-pretending)
-
Hi Stranger, here's the way I see it:
Creation points to a creator. A flint house in Norfolk must have been once a disorderly pile of stones. They couldn't form a house unless moved into position by a human. In the same way, the first tree must, we would expect, have been formed from the elements of which it consisted. It couldn't form by accident. Trees did not evolve from lower plants.
We can't, however, see the creator of that tree. But Jesus once spoke to a tree and it withered. He also healed disease, and calmed storms, by speaking to them.
So we have eyewitness evidence that the order in the universe came through some kind of speech.
Hope that makes sense.
Ok, I'll try again. Many people are convinced that the order in the natural world points to a creator. The problem is, they can't see him. Many people pray, hoping that he will hear them, and sometimes they might believe he has answered them. But in order to really know that he's there we need him to reveal himself. This is what the Bible is about.
The Bible says that Jesus' coming was announced centuries in advance, and that he had power over the entire natural world, including death.
The evidence for God is therefore two-pronged: he chooses to give us two lines of evidence so that we can be sure. The natural world and the Bible.
-
Ok, I'll try again. Many people are convinced that the order in the natural world points to a creator. The problem is, they can't see him. Many people pray, hoping that he will hear them, and sometimes they might believe he has answered them. But in order to really know that he's there we need him to reveal himself. This is what the Bible is about.
The Bible says that Jesus' coming was announced centuries in advance, and that he had power over the entire natural world, including death.
The evidence for God is therefore two-pronged: he chooses to give us two lines of evidence so that we can be sure. The natural world and the Bible.
The Bible says a lot of things, much of which are not in the least bit credible, particularly the god character.
-
Ok, I'll try again. Many people are convinced that the order in the natural world points to a creator.
Many people are foolish. Positing a god to explain order is a giant leap in the wrong direction: the explanation for order is something even more ordered but because we label it "god", we magically don't have to think about how come it exists.
A god that creates an ordered universe is no less strange and unexplained than an ordered universe by itself.
The problem is, they can't see him.
The problem is that there is no reason to take the idea seriously.
But in order to really know that he's there we need him to reveal himself. This is what the Bible is about.
The bible is an incoherent, often contradictory, mess. If it's a message from a god, said god is seriously messed up or has a terrible communication problem.
The Bible says that Jesus' coming was announced centuries in advance, and that he had power over the entire natural world, including death.
And we should take this seriously because...?
The evidence for God is therefore two-pronged: he chooses to give us two lines of evidence so that we can be sure. The natural world and the Bible non-existent.
FIFY
-
I am reminded of this passage from Mark 4 37:40 -
A furious squall came up, and the waves broke over the boat, so that it was nearly swamped. Jesus was in the stern, sleeping on a cushion. The disciples woke him and said to him, “Teacher, don’t you care if we drown?”
He got up, rebuked the wind and said to the waves, “Quiet! Be still!” Then the wind died down and it was completely calm.
He said to his disciples, “Why are you so afraid? Do you still have no faith?”
There is evidence that the sun is cooling slightly.
https://www.livescience.com/61716-sun-cooling-global-warming.html
I put my faith in the power of the Creator to help counter the follies of mankind.
I am reminded of this passage from Jeremy chapter 1:
Your god is a fiction. He won't save you.
-
According to Jonathan Franzen writing in the New Yorker, we are delusional to imagine we can stop or mitigate climate change; we should get real about it and focus on post-apocalypse planning instead
https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/what-if-we-stopped-pretending (https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/what-if-we-stopped-pretending)
We probably could stop it, but there isn't the motivation around the world. If we stopped cutting down trees and flying, became vegetarians (don't the Chinese have a much more veg-based diet?) And didn't have too many children, it could happen.
I've always been taught that it's not for us to tell others how to live, instead we should lead by example..
-
According to Jonathan Franzen writing in the New Yorker, we are delusional to imagine we can stop or mitigate climate change; we should get real about it and focus on post-apocalypse planning instead
https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/what-if-we-stopped-pretending (http://www.religionethics.co.uk/culture/cultural-comment/what-if-we-stopped-pretending)
Mostly agree with this article but best post-apocalypse plan is to not have children, grand children and so on.
-
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-49760164/climate-strike-what-us-children-are-sacrificing-for-the-cause
A commendable effort by youngsters but unfortunately too little too late.....
I can't imagine how climate change and the uncertainty that it brings will affect the psychology and sense of perpetual life that is so important to life healthy and happy lives.
-
Climate change is speeding up (accelerating).......
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-49773869
**********
The signs and impacts of global heating are speeding up, the latest science on climate change, published ahead of key UN talks in New York, says.
Sea-level rise has accelerated significantly over the same period, as CO2 emissions have hit new highs.
Recognising that global temperatures have risen by 1.1 degrees C since 1850, the paper notes they have gone up by 0.2C between 2011 and 2015.
Perhaps most worrying of all is the data on sea-level rise.
The average rate of rise since 1993 until now is 3.2mm per year. However, from May 2014 to 2019 the rise has increased to 5mm per year. The 10-year period from 2007-2016 saw an average of about 4mm per year.
The study underlines the fact that wherever you look on the planet right now, the story is the same: human-induced warming is impacting the scale and intensity of extreme weather events such as heatwaves and wildfires.
"Climate change due to us is accelerating and on a very dangerous course," said Prof Brian Hoskins, chair of the Grantham Institute, Imperial College London, and professor of meteorology, University of Reading.
***********
-
Labour debating Green New Deal, don't know if they will adopt it. One of its virtues is offering benefits, e.g., new jobs, quality of life. But you are up against denial, and passivity. I think that is changed by emergencies, well, I guess forest fires are an emergency, but we can stay in a bubble in the UK. More emergencies, I suppose, will happen.
-
Humans are much wiser than the Biblical god character.
Precious little evidence for that in your posts...
-
Precious little evidence for that in your posts...
;D
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p07p645f
Great podcast on climate change fears after Greta Thunberg's UN speech.
What Greta says is scary, but that’s the point. In this episode we speak to David Wallace Wells, author of The Uninhabitable Earth. David, like Greta, has spent a lot of time going through climate studies and talking to the scientists who’ve measured where we’re heading. In this episode he tells us how much our future remains in our hands.
-
Been reading some really vile rubbish about Greta on a thread on Premier Christian Radio's FB page: as I said there, some of them make me think there's a lot to be said for atheism.
-
Been reading some really vile rubbish about Greta on a thread on Premier Christian Radio's FB page: as I said there, some of them make me think there's a lot to be said for atheism.
Lots of atheists are horrible to Thunberg. It's not a determining characteristic.
-
I don't see what the big deal is about Greta. She is just a young girl who is speaking her mind. Lots of scientists, activists and even politicians have been saying the same thing for decades.
-
Sriram
Don't you think that there is something extraordinary about a sixteen year old Swedish schoolgirl, reported with Aspergers, being able to grab world headlines?
-
This is not about Greta's personality. This is about Climate Change and I still don't see why her involvement should make a difference when all the scientists, activists and politicians didn't make a difference, all these decades.
-
This is not about Greta's personality. This is about Climate Change and I still don't see why her involvement should make a difference when all the scientists, activists and politicians didn't make a difference, all these decades.
And yet patently, she has.
-
And yet patently, she has.
I agree.
-
This is not about Greta's personality. This is about Climate Change and I still don't see why her involvement should make a difference when all the scientists, activists and politicians didn't make a difference, all these decades.
Because she is giving a strong voice to the young who feel let down by the politicians and multinationals who have proved to be the block that prevents action being taken by those scientists, activists and politicians who do want to do something. That and our shocking apathy as a society that is willing to allow it to continue just as long as we get the next big best shiny I-phone.*
*Other models are available.
-
Presentation is everything.
As the trolls know well:
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/10/02/climate-change-activist-greta-thunberg-targeted-online-trolls/3843196002/
-
This is not about Greta's personality. This is about Climate Change and I still don't see why her involvement should make a difference when all the scientists, activists and politicians didn't make a difference, all these decades.
Perhaps because she isn't a scientist or a politician - I think we have to accept that she's an activist at this point. We've heard the scientists and the politicians, and those of us that were going to listen have done, and those of us that weren't going to listen have come up with the various dismissals.
There's a group out there, though - primarily conservative in nature - for whom family is more important than, say, academic experts spouting research papers, who want to provide their children with all the benefits of a thriving economy. Those people are suddenly challenged because a child is suddenly saying that's not what they want - and claiming to speak for other children as she does so. Those people who've dismissed the scientists and politicians for their own drive to give their family what they can are suddenly faced with the embodiment of the possibility they may have got it wrong.
That's why a different subset of people are sitting up to listen when she talks, and why a different group of people are suddenly going on the offensive about it.
O.
-
Ok....that may be true.
But what difference all this is going to make at this stage...I am not sure.
-
There is something reminiscent here about the legend of the little Dutch boy who saved Holland by sticking his finger in the dyke wall and stayed there all night until the adults found him and came to help.
Here we have a little Swedish girl in pigtails, wth Aspergers, to boot, doing what the adults could not, or would not.
For those who see the need for change, she will be forever a hero; for those fighting to preserve business as usual, she must be an infuriating irritation.
-
There is something reminiscent here about the legend of the little Dutch boy who saved Holland by sticking his finger in the dyke wall and stayed there all night until the adults found him and came to help.
Here we have a little Swedish girl in pigtails, wth Aspergers, to boot, doing what the adults could not, or would not.
For those who see the need for change, she will be forever a hero; for those fighting to preserve business as usual, she must be an infuriating irritation.
Finger in the dyke? ;D
-
There is something reminiscent here about the legend of the little Dutch boy who saved Holland by sticking his finger in the dyke wall and stayed there all night until the adults found him and came to help.
Here we have a little Swedish girl in pigtails, wth Aspergers, to boot, doing what the adults could not, or would not.
For those who see the need for change, she will be forever a hero; for those fighting to preserve business as usual, she must be an infuriating irritation.
As suggested in the Jonathon Franzen article you linked to earlier the chance of preventing climate change or even making a significant difference is really poor. However that is not the point: we will make choices and take actions - it's up to you as an individual whether the choices you make or the actions you take are the right ones or not.
The same message recurs throughout human mythology. Sriram could take the same thing from the Gita.
https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/what-if-we-stopped-pretending
-
As suggested in the Jonathon Franzen article you linked to earlier the chance of preventing climate change or even making a significant difference is really poor. However that is not the point: we will make choices and take actions - it's up to you as an individual whether the choices you make or the actions you take are the right ones or not.
The same message recurs throughout human mythology. Sriram could take the same thing from the Gita.
https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/what-if-we-stopped-pretending
Oh....so you think I don't care about climate change and am not doing anything about it.....simply because I don't consider Greta as a big deal?!!
That's a nice one...!!! ::)
-
But in reality she is a big deal.
She's done more than you or I to raise the issues of the climate crisis. That is a simple fact.
Why you seem to be slightly miffed by it I haven't the slightest notion. Me, I'm glad she has raised the profile of the issue.
-
Alright...alright! So, most of you need a 15 year old girl's speech to impress upon you the importance of Climate change and the contributions that we need to make.....regardless of what hundreds of scientists and others have been saying for decades. Fine!
-
Alright...alright! So, most of you need a 15 year old girl's speech to impress upon you the importance of Climate change and the contributions that we need to make.....regardless of what hundreds of scientists and others have been saying for decades. Fine!
Why does Thunberg make you feel so insecure?
-
Trent is right, Sriram, this is a big deal.
A 16 year old schoolgirl from Sweden has had far more effect than all the scientists and concerned politicians in bringing the approaching calamity to everyone's notice - because she is just that - a 16 year old Swedish schoolgirl.
She doesn't use rational scientific language to impress her message on the world. She uses passion. She uses the fact that our selfish behaviour is screwing up her future. Not our future because will shall not be around.
With a bit of luck she might even have impressed her message on the walking talking arsehole which - currently - is the president of the USA. If that particular manifestation of the failings of humanity can even consider her message she will have been far more successful than all the aforementioned experts.
-
NS,
Why would I be insecure about a school girl in Sweden?!! I can see why schoolchildren draw inspiration from one of their own. That makes sense.
But Govt. leaders and oldy goldies like most of you here, who did not bother to change their personal lifestyles or Govt policies in spite of decades of warning..... suddenly being inspired by a school girl is.....well.....amusing! :D
Maybe I am right that many people are still adolescent in their mental makeup.
Well...doesn't matter really. All for the good finally, I guess!
-
Trent is right, Sriram, this is a big deal.
A 16 year old schoolgirl from Sweden has had far more effect than all the scientists and concerned politicians in bringing the approaching calamity to everyone's notice - because she is just that - a 16 year old Swedish schoolgirl.
She doesn't use rational scientific language to impress her message on the world. She uses passion. She uses the fact that our selfish behaviour is screwing up her future. Not our future because will shall not be around.
With a bit of luck she might even have impressed her message on the walking talking arsehole which - currently - is the president of the USA. If that particular manifestation of the failings of humanity can even consider her message she will have been far more successful than all the aforementioned experts.
Yeah HH....maybe you are right.
-
NS,
Why would I be insecure about a school girl in Sweden?!! I can see why schoolchildren draw inspiration from one of their own. That makes sense.
But Govt. leaders and oldy goldies like most of you here, who did not bother to change their personal lifestyles or Govt policies in spite of decades of warning..... suddenly being inspired by a school girl is.....well.....amusing! :D
Maybe I am right that many people are still adolescent in their mental makeup.
Well...doesn't matter really. All for the good finally, I guess!
I have no idea why Thumberg makes you insecure, and yet it is clear from your post she does. To the extent that you have needed to misrepresent what people8 have said. Why did you feel the need to do that?
-
But Govt. leaders and oldy goldies like most of you here, who did not bother to change their personal lifestyles or Govt policies in spite of decades of warning..... suddenly being inspired by a school girl is.....well.....amusing! :D
Maybe I am right that many people are still adolescent in their mental makeup.
Don't be so insulting. You, if you read previous threads, would be aware that many posters were concerned about this issue before GT came along.
All I was saying is that she has managed to reach more people than you and arguably David Attenborough. That doesn't diminish either yours or David A's efforts, it just means another channel for challenging the malign forces determined to keep to the status quo has opened up.
-
Oh....so you think I don't care about climate change and am not doing anything about it.....simply because I don't consider Greta as a big deal?!!
That's a nice one...!!! ::)
Quite a bizarre response, don't know how you got to it.. seems like "protesting too much"!
Greta is a face and emotional connection, there are millions of others engaged. The main thing is to have a framework in place that addresses the economics as well as the technology: Ocasio-Cortez and the Green New Deal - at least for the USA. Then, to build around it.
-
Margaret Thatcher was the Greta Thunberg of her day, apparently
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49967784
-
no need to panic , global warming will never happen. The Earth is flat!
-
https://next-media-api.ft.com/renditions/15688350393280/1280x720.mp4 (https://next-media-api.ft.com/renditions/15688350393280/1280x720.mp4)
-
no need to panic , global warming will never happen. The Earth is flat!
So we should be talking about flat earth warming! ;D
-
Extinction Rebellion will lose much support from this type of approach. The reaction of the crowd is quite scary, though he does appear to kick out at the initial attempt to remove him.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-50079716
-
Extinction Rebellion will lose much support from this type of approach. The reaction of the crowd is quite scary, though he does appear to kick out at the initial attempt to remove him.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-50079716
By behaving badly the ER lot lose any credibility.
-
By behaving badly the ER lot lose any credibility.
It isn't really the behaving badly, it's targeting public transport that will lose support from those who might support them.
-
Extinction Rebellion will lose much support from this type of approach. The reaction of the crowd is quite scary, though he does appear to kick out at the initial attempt to remove him.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-50079716
Got to love Canning Town! (Lived there for the first six years of my life)
Haven't any of these protestors got jobs to go to?
-
Got to love Canning Town! (Lived there for the first six years of my life)
Haven't any of these protestors got jobs to go to?
There seem to be protesters with jobs. I am sure some don't. Is it relevant to whether they are right?
-
There seem to be protesters with jobs. I am sure some don't. Is it relevant to whether they are right?
No. I just wonder. I mean, I have to pay for my food etc, or maybe they're living off mummy and daddy's money. Anyway, good on the East End working class who didn't put up with their silly buggers.
-
No. I just wonder. I mean, I have to pay for my food etc, or maybe they're living off mummy and daddy's money. Anyway, good on the East End working class who didn't put up with their silly buggers.
Yeah cos everyone catching the DLR at Canning Town is working class!
-
Got to love Canning Town! (Lived there for the first six years of my life)
Haven't any of these protestors got jobs to go to?
Nobody will have jobs to go to if we continue to ignore the science.
-
Nobody will have jobs to go to if we continue to ignore the science.
Though making stupid counterproductive protests won't help either.
-
Nobody will have jobs to go to if we continue to ignore the science.
I'm not talking about ignoring the science, but pissing people off like that is wrong and I also heard many of them are being payed to protest, which means you have to question their motives.
-
I'm talking about ignoring the science, but pissing people off like that is wrong and I also heard many of them are being payed to protest, which means you have to question their motives.
Though just as with the idea of some protesters being jobless, it has nothing to do about being right.
-
Though just as with the idea of some protesters being jobless, it has nothing to do about being right.
Granted. I do wonder who's paying them though and why. I think they overstate their case sometimes and focus their protests in completely the wrong direction, like the average person trying to get to work to earn a crust as if it was all their fault (which it isn't).
-
Granted. I do wonder who's paying them though and why. I think they overstate their case sometimes and focus their protests in completely the wrong direction, like the average person trying to get to work to earn a crust as if it was all their fault (which it isn't).
I think yesterday's protests were deeply stupid. XR isn't really an organisation more a label. There ware a lot of XR supporters who disagreed with it. Somehow a protest on the street which may delay people in buses is seen as ok since they feel collateral rather than specific damage. Too much of the protests though seem as you have been expressing to have a strong miasma of middle class privilege. Yesterday was so obtuse that part of me wondered about whether it might be done as a way to make XR look bad.
-
I think yesterday's protests were deeply stupid. XR isn't really an organisation more a label. There ware a lot of XR supporters who disagreed with it. Somehow a protest on the street which may delay people in buses is seen as ok since they feel collateral rather than specific damage. Too much of the protests though seem as you have been expressing to have a strong miasma of middle class privilege. Yesterday was so obtuse that part of wondered about whether it might be done as a way to make XR look bad.
Possible, of course. As for middle class privilige, glad you noticed that point. Of course they have as much right to protest as anyone else, but it's easy to see why some lose patience with it, and the message is then lost with it.
-
Possible, of course. As for middle class privilige, glad you noticed that point. Of course they have as much right to protest as anyone else, but it's easy to see why some lose patience with it, and the message is then lost with it.
Since XR is non centralised, then any infiltration would be very easy. I've seen a lot of condemnation of the protests from XR supporters but in many ways that's going to be ignored by anyone seeing the actions. What in some ways are strengths for XR, its flexibility and lack of central control are its weaknesses as well.
-
For me, I believe the science and believe we not only have to have a serious rethink, but also actually do something so that we can preserve what is left for future generations. What I don't buy into is the mantra and the blame game (that is, blaming previous generations).
-
Worse than expected.....
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-50236882
**********
Hundreds of millions of people worldwide are at risk of losing their homes as entire cities sink under rising seas over the next three decades, according to researchers.
The findings, published Tuesday in the journal Nature Communications, put nearly three times as many people in coastal areas at risk from flooding than previously thought, and are the result of new advances in elevation modeling technology.
Global sea levels are expected to rise between two to seven feet (0.6 meters to 2.1 meters) -- and possibly more -- over the course of the 21st century.
***********
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-50215011
Apparently asthma inhalers are increasing the carbon footprint. Our middle daughter suffers from asthma and will be very shocked by this as she is very environmentally friendly.
-
This though doesn't seem to show that climate change itself is worse just that they have more accurate date of the elevation and have changed the estimate of those likely to live in the area - note that isn't to say that it is not a huge issue, just that the reporting here seems very muddied, as is so often.
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-50215011
Apparently asthma inhalers are increasing the carbon footprint. Our middle daughter suffers from asthma and will be very shocked by this as she is very environmentally friendly.
oh FFS !!!
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-50215011
Apparently asthma inhalers are increasing the carbon footprint. Our middle daughter suffers from asthma and will be very shocked by this as she is very environmentally friendly.
Given that existing increases the carbon footprint more than anything else, anything on top of that is obviously going to increase it.
-
Worse than expected.....
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-50236882
**********
Hundreds of millions of people worldwide are at risk of losing their homes as entire cities sink under rising seas over the next three decades, according to researchers.
The findings, published Tuesday in the journal Nature Communications, put nearly three times as many people in coastal areas at risk from flooding than previously thought, and are the result of new advances in elevation modeling technology.
Global sea levels are expected to rise between two to seven feet (0.6 meters to 2.1 meters) -- and possibly more -- over the course of the 21st century.
***********
hi Sriram
Well I gave it some thought and decided I don't really care .
I know , but I can't change who I am !
Don't worry , be happy 😎
-
Actually even I don't....much. But that's because we are fairly aged and we are on the way out.
Think of youngsters just getting married and having children...! Doesn't look very good for them! :(
Life is good only with the illusion of perpetuity.
-
Actually even I don't....much. But that's because we are fairly aged and we are on the way out.
Think of youngsters just getting married and having children...! Doesn't look very good for them! :(
Life is good only with the illusion of perpetuity.
It's not going to happen overnight so there's plenty of time to catch a bus and get the hell out of Dodge 😯
-
You seriously expect hundreds of millions of people to just catch a bus and go somewhere else to live their normal lives??!! Do you realize how much peoples lives are going to be affected even without the possibility of millions of deaths?!
Even others who live inland would be significantly affected due to relocation of people from coastal areas. Infrastructure, businesses, agriculture and many other areas will be affected significantly. Life will not be the same for anyone.
Even today many youngsters are deciding not to have children because of the uncertainties of the future... Peoples mind and outlook changes significantly due to predictions of such major events.
-
hi Sriram
Well I gave it some thought and decided I don't really care .
I know , but I can't change who I am !
Don't worry , be happy 😎
It's indifference like this that enrages the young. They see the older generation as guilty of allowing the climate crisis to fester, given they basically don't give a shit about anybody other than themselves.
-
It's indifference like this that enrages the young. They see the older generation as guilty of allowing the climate crisis to fester, given they basically don't give a shit about anybody other than themselves.
too fuckin right mate
Have a nice day 😇
-
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-50578516
************
Critical elements in the Earth’s climate may be more likely to break down than previously thought, according to a group of scientists.
Their commentary in the journal Nature says there’s growing evidence that irreversible climatic changes could be triggered within a few decades.
The authors claim this could lead to a “climatic emergency” in which one shift amplifies another.
we must admit that we have underestimated the risks of unleashing irreversible changes, where the planet self-amplifies global warming," he says.
"This is what we now start seeing, already at 1C global warming.
“This provides strong evidence for declaring a state of planetary emergency to unleash world action that accelerates the path towards a world that can continue evolving on a stable planet.”
************
-
This link is better.....
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/28/health/climate-crisis-global-tipping-point-intl-hnk/index.html
-
Moderator:
Could I point out that, following previous issues, we do not allow discussions on the events, postings or conduct of members of other sites.
As such several recent posts will be removed for review.
-
Shell and Exxon both did their own research into fossil fuel driven global warming back in the 80s. The projections they came up with are strikingly similar to those produced by mainstream climate science now. But they kept these findings under their hat and instead poured resources into disinformation campaigns aimed at undermining public confidence in climate science. Their findings were eventually leaked in 2015. It seems the calculation they made was that widespread ecological devastation with potentially existential risk to humanity was a risk worth taking in order to maintain short term profitability and market share. Makes me kind of sick given I was working as a contractor for Shell throughout the 1980s.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2018/sep/19/shell-and-exxons-secret-1980s-climate-change-warnings (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2018/sep/19/shell-and-exxons-secret-1980s-climate-change-warnings)
-
So it goes on, an article about abnormal temperatures in the Antarctic:
https://tinyurl.com/R-ECLCH
-
Within a few decades, increase in avg temp of about 3 degrees is a given. Maybe even up to 5 degrees in the worst case. It is already 1 degree up.
Not a very rosy picture for our grandchildren, I am afraid.
-
Came across this today, worth a watch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpTHi7O66pI
Reducing livestock is the worst thing we can do, as they trample and fertilize grass (the trampling flattens the grass, aiding the biological decay of each year's crop once it's 'flowered', necessary for it to grow again the following year - which is why we used to burn the stubble)
-
He is not advocating clearing forest in order to make room for cattle. He's talking about getting grass to grow again on areas which are turning to desert. He reckons his method could reverse global warming too.
-
Watch the video when you get time, he is definitely not advocating clearing forest in order to make room for cattle. He's talking about getting grass to grow again on areas which are turning to desert. He reckons his method could reverse global warming too.
Yep, my mistake. I realised once I'd watched all the way through - that's why I deleted my post. Cheers.
-
Today is Earth Overshoot Day for this year. ............... https://www.euronews.com/2020/08/22/explainer-today-is-earth-overshoot-day-here-s-what-it-means
-
Smart choice of a place to live, all you Glaswegians and Edinburghers. Risk analysts Verisk Maplecroft produced a study of climate change vulnerability and out of 1800 or so cities assessed worldwide the five cities considered most insulated from the impacts of climate change included Glasgow and Edinburgh. Whatever you do, don't upsticks and move to Kampala or Dar-es-Salaam.
https://www.maplecroft.com/insights/analysis/84-of-worlds-fastest-growing-cities-face-extreme-climate-change-risks/ (https://www.maplecroft.com/insights/analysis/84-of-worlds-fastest-growing-cities-face-extreme-climate-change-risks/)
-
Yeah...as the Covid19 problem slows down...we can start worrying about Climate Change, heart problems, cancers...etc.. Nice! :(
-
We're screwed. As torridon quoted up-thread: "we're in a genetic cul-de-sac; clever enough to understand the problem, but too stupid, selfish and weak to respond".
What category does the ability to cause this come in?
Clever enough ........or too stupid, selfish and weak to respond?
-
Did the lock downs this year actually succeed in reducing global carbon dioxide levels ? I just downloaded CO2 data from Mauna Loa observatory and charted it expecting to see a dip through March - May this year. Have a look and see what impact the worldwide economic lock down had in our fight to lower carbon dioxide levels. Data is up to July 2020
https://datastudio.google.com/reporting/b4a43d9b-c565-4db2-91b3-31958447882c (https://datastudio.google.com/reporting/b4a43d9b-c565-4db2-91b3-31958447882c)
-
Warming produces bizarre landscape features in Siberia
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-54195656 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-54195656)
-
Goodness, that certainly is scarring.
-
Full on climate denial sermonising from American pastor John MacArthur
https://www.alternet.org/2020/10/god-intended-it-as-a-disposable-planet-meet-the-us-pastor-preaching-climate-change-denial/ (https://www.alternet.org/2020/10/god-intended-it-as-a-disposable-planet-meet-the-us-pastor-preaching-climate-change-denial/)
Does being a pastor buy you a free pass for spreading disinformation ?
-
Interactive maps from the National Trust here about the projected effects of climate change in the UK:
https://nationaltrust.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=0bc569747210413a8c8598535a6b36e1
Takes a bit of getting used to but very interesting.
Edit: Sorry only England, Wales and N.Ireland showing up.
-
Full on climate denial sermonising from American pastor John MacArthur
https://www.alternet.org/2020/10/god-intended-it-as-a-disposable-planet-meet-the-us-pastor-preaching-climate-change-denial/ (https://www.alternet.org/2020/10/god-intended-it-as-a-disposable-planet-meet-the-us-pastor-preaching-climate-change-denial/)
Does being a pastor buy you a free pass for spreading disinformation ?
It is sad his his deluded followers can't see how crazy this guy is. >:(
-
https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/irreversible-warming-tipping-point-possibly-triggered-say-scientist-2464879?pfrom=home-ndtv_topscroll
**********
The tipping point for irreversible global warming may have already been triggered, the scientist who led the biggest-ever expedition to the Arctic warned on Tuesday.
"The disappearance of summer sea ice in the Arctic is one of the first landmines in this minefield, one of the tipping points that we set off first when we push warming too far," said Markus Rex.
"And one can essentially ask if we haven't already stepped on this mine and already set off the beginning of the explosion."
**********
-
... and a warning for the UK.....
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57487943
-
... and a warning for the UK.....
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57487943
Long term planning. Not really our thing.
-
Probably one of the first islands to disappear due to climate change..... :(
https://www.bbc.com/reel/video/p09lpjnj/is-this-the-first-island-to-vanish-due-to-climate-change-
-
Temperatures in north west US and Canada barely believable
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jun/30/lytton-hottest-places-world-climate-emergency :o
-
Yes who would have thought one of the coldest countries on Earth would be posting up such temperatures. What's going to happen when a heatwave like that hits Mumbai or Jakarta or Lagos.
-
And Lytton burns
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-wildfires-june-30-2021-1.6085919
-
There will still be people like that cretin, Trump, who will deny global warming has anything to do with human activity. >:(
-
There will still be people like that cretin, Trump, who will deny global warming has anything to do with human activity. >:(
Yes there will, but sensible people, people who care have just got to make sure that the arguments are made and backed up and people will come to realise the truth of the matter. In some cases, Lytton for example, nature will do the persuading all by itself.
-
Yes there will, but sensible people, people who care have just got to make sure that the arguments are made and backed up and people will come to realise the truth of the matter. In some cases, Lytton for example, nature will do the persuading all by itself.
I hope you are right.
-
I may be wrong if the BBC's latest attempt is anything to go by :(
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/outrage-as-bbc-bitesize-lists-positive-impacts-of-climate-change-279265/?
If they were covering Italy in the 2nd World war I'm sure they would be focussing on Mussolini's fabled talents at getting the trains to run on time.*
*Except he didn't. But the state of the BBC at the moment they probably wouldn't have checked that fact.
I've probably said this before but if one person says it's raining outside and the other says it's dry. It's not the BBC's job to report both views, it's their job to look out of the fucking window.
-
I may be wrong if the BBC's latest attempt is anything to go by :(
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/outrage-as-bbc-bitesize-lists-positive-impacts-of-climate-change-279265/?
If they were covering Italy in the 2nd World war I'm sure they would be focussing on Mussolini's fabled talents at getting the trains to run on time.*
*Except he didn't. But the state of the BBC at the moment they probably wouldn't have checked that fact.
I've probably said this before but if one person says it's raining outside and the other says it's dry. It's not the BBC's job to report both views, it's their job to look out of the fucking window.
Bitesize, though, is constrained by the National Curriculum - is there anything in that which constrains the debate at all? If I recall, that was last updated by Gove's DfE, and Gove wasn't the greenest of Tories.
O.
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-europe-57860153
For those in denial it must be getting more and more difficult to avoid the conclusion that something is really, really wrong.
I spoke to my partners cousin who lives in Sinzig, a town in the district of Ahrweiler yesterday evening. She is ok, but completely cut off. Which is very difficult for her as her husband who is terminally ill is in hospital in Bonn which is normally an hours drive away. She cannot currently get there at all.
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-europe-57860153
For those in denial it must be getting more and more difficult to avoid the conclusion that something is really, really wrong.
I spoke to my partners cousin who lives in Sinzig is a town in the district of Ahrweiler yesterday evening. She is ok, but completely cut off. Which is very difficult for her as her husband who is terminally ill is in hospital in Bonn which is normally an hours drive away. She cannot currently get there at all.
How terribly sad. :( Those in climate denial denial are idiots, imo.
-
Splendid article:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jul/22/covid-climate-crisis-politics-individualism?
Draws some parallels between our responses to Covid and the climate crisis.
-
So you kind of think maybe we can have a bit of a break and there will be at least a pause in the bad news. Wrong.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/aug/05/climate-crisis-scientists-spot-warning-signs-of-gulf-stream-collapse?
-
The verdict is in. It's not good news:
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/aug/09/humans-have-caused-unprecedented-and-irreversible-change-to-climate-scientists-warn
-
It is very bad news, but no doubt the climate change deniers will keep on pretending it has nothing to do with human activity. :o
-
It is very bad news, but no doubt the climate change deniers will keep on pretending it has nothing to do with human activity. :o
Unfortunately I think you are correct.
-
I feel it's probably past the point of no return
-
But it's all ok Alok Sharma is 'literally throwing the kitchen sink at climate change'
-
Photos showing rapid changes....
https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2021/08/weather/antarctica-climate-change-cnnphotos/
-
Temperatures at the Greenland summit over the weekend rose above freezing for the third time in less than a decade. The warm air fueled an extreme rain event that dumped 7 billion tons of water on the ice sheet, enough to fill the Reflecting Pool at the National Mall in Washington, DC, nearly 250,000 times.
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/weather/greenland-summit-rain-climate-change/index.html
-
There is a very significant activity which seems to be ignored in most climate change discussions.
It currently causes more damage than the entire aerospace industry.
It is set to double within the next four years, with no indication of restraint.
What is it?
See below ........
Mobile phone technology
-
Mobile phone technology
What aspects of mobile phone technology do you think are especially problematic with regard to climate change?
-
What aspects of mobile phone technology do you think are especially problematic with regard to climate change?
I think it's related to this
https://theconversation.com/how-smartphones-are-heating-up-the-planet-92793
-
I don't want to continue posting depressing articles but.......
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/09/earths-tipping-points-closer-current-climate-plans-wont-work-global-heating
The last paragraph sums it up:
If Earth systems cross critical thresholds, everything we did and everything we were – the learning, the wisdom, the stories, the art, the politics, the love, the hate, the anger and the hope – will be reduced to stratigraphy. It’s not a smooth and linear transition we need. It’s a crash course.
-
Ffs!
https://youtube.com/shorts/aZXrDXRwgq0?feature=share
-
Ffs!
https://youtube.com/shorts/aZXrDXRwgq0?feature=share
Here is the official transcript of Johnson's 2019 speech to the UN.
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-speech-to-the-un-general-assembly-24-september-2019
Alexander Johnson's jaw looks a little strange as he is talking about Kermit the Frog. There is software available which can produce fake spoken material both auditory and visual.
My judgement is that "Ffs!" is intended to be a judgement of Johnson's choice of words. It's not that I disagree with your sentiments about the PM, NS, but I think that you have been conned here. He mentioned Prometheus in his speech (which is in line with his claimed proficiency in dead Mediterranean languages) and it is my suspicion that this passage has been ... err ... adjusted. And you have swallowed the adjustment.
-
Here is the official transcript of Johnson's 2019 speech to the UN.
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-speech-to-the-un-general-assembly-24-september-2019
Alexander Johnson's jaw looks a little strange as he is talking about Kermit the Frog. There is software available which can produce fake spoken material both auditory and visual.
My judgement is that "Ffs!" is intended to be a judgement of Johnson's choice of words. It's not that I disagree with your sentiments about the PM, NS, but I think that you have been conned here. He mentioned Prometheus in his speech (which is in line with his claimed proficiency in dead Mediterranean languages) and it is my suspicion that this passage has been ... err ... adjusted. And you have swallowed the adjustment.
Not sure why you thought a 2019 speech was relevant but your 'suspicion' is unfounded
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/news/boris-johnson-accuses-kermit-the-frog-of-being-wrong-in-climate-speech-at-un/ar-AAOK1uc
-
So ...there was I - I took him for his better. That'll teach me.
I made a search for the speech and the 2019 one was the only UN speech which came up. One newspaper article I came across said that Johnson would be adressing the UN on 24 September. You can't believe anything in the papers, now.
-
So ...there was I - I took him for his better. That'll teach me.
I made a search for the speech and the 2019 one was the only UN speech which came up. One newspaper article I came across said that Johnson would be adressing the UN on 24 September. You can't believe anything in the papers, now.
He's a dangerous lying corrupt thug.
-
The Guardian's take on Johnson's speech: what he actually said and what the Guardian think he really meant.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2021/sep/23/boris-johnsons-climate-speech-annotated-what-he-said-and-what-he-meant
-
Seen in the twittersphere:
"Muppet literally quotes Muppet at the UN. Muppet inception. We are in hell."
and also:
"For ten years after the release of Al Gore’s film ‘An Inconvenient Truth,’ @BorisJohnson carried on as a committed climate change denialist, and now, apparently, we’re meant to take this cartoon clown seriously, as he stands up there, dribbling words out of his mouth arse."
-
Marina Hyde on right royal hypocrisy on climate change
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/oct/15/green-royals-saving-the-planet-helicopter-queen-charles-william-climate
-
And now....heritage forests apparently emit carbon into the atmosphere instead of removing it....
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/10/27/world/unesco-world-heritage-sites-carbon-emissions-climate/index.html
***********
Human activity and climate change-fueled disasters have turned 10 of the planet's internationally recognized forests, also known as World Heritage sites, from carbon absorbers into carbon emitters, researchers have found.
The report from UNESCO found these sites can absorb approximately 190 million tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere each year -- roughly half the amount of the United Kingdom's annual fossil fuel emissions.
But in the past 20 years, many of these sites showed an increase in emissions, some even exceeded how much carbon they were removing from the atmosphere.
UNESCO researchers said two main factors are causing forests to flip from sinks to sources: climate change-fueled extreme weather events including wildfires, storm and drought; and human land-use pressures such as illegal logging, wood harvesting and agricultural practices such as livestock grazing.
***********
We just can't win, it seems....
-
And now....heritage forests apparently emit carbon into the atmosphere instead of removing it....
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/10/27/world/unesco-world-heritage-sites-carbon-emissions-climate/index.html
...
We just can't win, it seems....
We? This is all down to human activity. Global warming and continuing pollution could be halted if we humans only organised ourselves properly - to achieve that.
-
We? This is all down to human activity. Global warming and continuing pollution could be halted if we humans only organised ourselves properly - to achieve that.
Interesting point in one of the papers today.
There is a lot of concern about the willingness of China and India to engage in action to limit or reduce global warming. But the former (but not the latter) spent about 30 years with a policy which is perhaps the most important in terms of reducing emissions - limiting population growth. Without their one child policy just imaging how much worse the situation would be today if China had had exponential population growth over the past 30 years.
Saving the planet from global warming wasn't the reason why China adopted the policy, but had they not done so and population growth had continued as it had been before the policy was introduced their population could well have been 50% more than it currently is.
-
Interesting point in one of the papers today.
There is a lot of concern about the willingness of China and India to engage in action to limit or reduce global warming. But the former (but not the latter) spent about 30 years with a policy which is perhaps the most important in terms of reducing emissions - limiting population growth. Without their one child policy just imaging how much worse the situation would be today if China had had exponential population growth over the past 30 years.
Saving the planet from global warming wasn't the reason why China adopted the policy, but had they not done so and population growth had continued as it had been before the policy was introduced their population could well have been 50% more than it currently is.
It might have been ... but exploring such possibilities is really complicated. Currently the Chinese population growth rate is about a third of India (.37% vs .99%) but the per capita carbon footprint is three times higher, for similar total population sizes. The US, with a quarter of India's population puts out twice as much total carbon.
Population should be managed along with everything else, but how it is managed matters a lot.
-
It might have been ... but exploring such possibilities is really complicated. Currently the Chinese population growth rate is about a third of India (.37% vs .99%) but the per capita carbon footprint is three times higher, for similar total population sizes. The US, with a quarter of India's population puts out twice as much total carbon.
Population should be managed along with everything else, but how it is managed matters a lot.
Absolutely - both population number plus carbon footprint per capita are really important. The nightmare being situations where both rise rapidly, which could be the case for India. I think my point is that there is a lot of focus on one half of the issue, footprint per capita, but far less on the 'elephant in the room' of ever increasing numbers of humans on the planet.
-
Interesting article on the perception of climate change amongst young people
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/climate-crisis-doom
-
Don't agree with all of this but it's coruscating stuff
https://archive.vn/alj7r#comments-anchor
-
Watched the march past my window just up from Glasgow Green, estimate was about 40k
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-59185007
-
Moderator:
A number of posts which derailed into the role of 'God' in Climate Change have been split to for a new thread in the Theism and Atheism Board.
http://www.religionethics.co.uk/index.php?topic=18862.msg840359#new
-
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-59220687
***********
Despite pledges made at the climate summit COP26, the world is still nowhere near its goals on limiting global temperature rise, a new analysis shows.
It calculates that the world is heading for 2.4C of warming, far more than the 1.5C limit nations committed to.
Based on what countries have put on the table for 2030, the world is set to warm by 2.4C by 2100. That picture gets a bit better if you include the US's and China's long-term targets, which reduces the temperature to 2.1C.
***********
-
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-59220687
***********
Despite pledges made at the climate summit COP26, the world is still nowhere near its goals on limiting global temperature rise, a new analysis shows.
It calculates that the world is heading for 2.4C of warming, far more than the 1.5C limit nations committed to.
Based on what countries have put on the table for 2030, the world is set to warm by 2.4C by 2100. That picture gets a bit better if you include the US's and China's long-term targets, which reduces the temperature to 2.1C.
***********
It's all bollocks, Sririam.
They make pledges they know that they will not have to keep as they won't be in power.
Two questions:
How many climate conferences have we had in the past?
How often has the global temperature decreased?
I'll give you a clue. The answer to the second question is zero.
The answer to the first is significantly higher.
As Greta said: Blah, blah, blah.
-
Lying incompetent racist thug PM doesn't know where COP26 took place.
https://twitter.com/scotfoodjames/status/1459981076194074629?t=98jaMrF0px_OGXWa6vU6eA&s=19
-
38 degrees centigrade in the Arctic....!
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-59649066
*********
The highest temperature ever recorded in the Arctic, 38C (100F), has been officially confirmed, sounding "alarm bells" over Earth's changing climate.
The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) on Tuesday verified the record, reported in the Siberian town of Verkhoyansk on 20 June last year.
The temperature was 18C higher than the area's average daily maximum for June.
*********
-
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/18/scientists-watch-giant-doomsday-glacier-in-antarctica-with-concern?
Where's Superman with his super freezing breath when you need him?
-
Probably a silly question, but is there any evidence that the global temperature is in homeostasis, whereby it increases as humans burn fossil fuels, thus contributing to warming, at which point less fossil fuels are burned leading to cooling, and so on? This would happen as the human population increases, so there may not be evidence yet.
-
Probably a silly question, but is there any evidence that the global temperature is in homeostasis, whereby it increases as humans burn fossil fuels, thus contributing to warming, at which point less fossil fuels are burned leading to cooling, and so on? This would happen as the human population increases, so there may not be evidence yet.
I don't think it's quite as simple as that. Fossil fuels are used for a lot more than just heating. They are increasingly used for cooling (because of the warming we are creating) for example. The increased wealth in India & China where consumer-led growth is also feeding into global warming via increased car ownership, etc. is a huge factor. By which I'm not blaming India & China in any way, but the world's economy is predicated on the cheapest methods of growth possible, currently that model, in large parts of the world, relies overwhelmingly on fossil fuels. It has to change if we are to stand any chance of controlling the climate crisis.
-
Probably a silly question, but is there any evidence that the global temperature is in homeostasis, whereby it increases as humans burn fossil fuels, thus contributing to warming, at which point less fossil fuels are burned leading to cooling, and so on? This would happen as the human population increases, so there may not be evidence yet.
Part of the problem with this possibility is that it's not direct heating caused by the burning of fossil fuels that's leading to the increase in global temperature - the direct energy released is miniscule. The chemical shift in the atmosphere and oceans is what's causing the increase in temperature, and even if there is a reduction in use of the various contributors to that it will take an immensely long time for those chemical shifts to naturally revert.
The greenhouse gasses are already in the atmosphere, reducing consumption doesn't make those go away, it just slows the rate at which we're adding to them.
O.
-
It has to change if we are to stand any chance of controlling the climate crisis.
I'm fairly sure car use is reduced during the summer, and household heating certainly is. Therefore if the climate gets warmer, fossil fuel use will decrease.
The chemical shift in the atmosphere and oceans is what's causing the increase in temperature
Right, but wouldn'tincreased CO2 encourage more plant growth, which would take it oy of the atmosphere?
-
I'm fairly sure car use is reduced during the summer, and household heating certainly is. Therefore if the climate gets warmer, fossil fuel use will decrease.
I'm fairly sure that when it is Winter here it is Summer in Australia and they have their air-con on full blast.
Is car use less in Summer? The last time I did a journey in the Summer to go on holiday in Devon I think I would probably have to say no to that.
You can't seriously be thinking that because we have a warm summer here that it is going to have a significant impact worldwide.
Anyway, here because I don't think you'll believe me, take a look at this. No sign of any lessening of usage of fossil fuel (as in we are ripping through it at a staggering rate) wouldn't you agree:
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/global-fossil-fuel-consumption?country=~OWID_WRL
EDIT: On car usage if you check here: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/road-traffic-statistics-tra
Scroll down to: TRA0305: Average daily traffic flow by month in Great Britain, 5-year average
you will see that car usage is higher in Summer.
-
Two things, Trent, we will run out if fossil fuels and also space to live as the population increases. So at some point the temperature will come down, or at least stabilize. The population won't increase indefinitely because it needs space to grow crops.
By for the moment, I do agree it's pretty catastrophic.
-
Two things, Trent, we will run out if fossil fuels and also space to live as the population increases. So at some point the temperature will come down, or at least stabilize. The population won't increase indefinitely because it needs space to grow crops.
By for the moment, I do agree it's pretty catastrophic.
As I think Outrider already alluded to we are way past the point where things will revert easily. We are fast approaching a tipping point where widespread disruption will not be avoidable. We need to focus on that and not on some wishy washy feeling that it will all balance itself out. It won't. At least not without huge loss of life and displacement of huge numbers of people. And that's just for starters.
-
As I think Outrider already alluded to we are way past the point where things will revert easily. We are fast approaching a tipping point where widespread disruption will not be avoidable. We need to focus on that and not on some wishy washy feeling that it will all balance itself out. It won't. At least not without huge loss of life and displacement of huge numbers of people. And that's just for starters.
As everyone wants to get back to "normal" - we will just have to learn to live with it! (/end sarcasm)
-
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/03/28/weather/antarctica-world-record-high-temperature-anomaly-climate/index.html
***********
Scientists were shocked this month when a research station in Antarctica reported extraordinarily warm weather.
The temperature at Concordia Research station atop Dome C on the Antarctic Plateau -- typically known as the coldest place on Earth -- surged to an astounding 11.3 degrees Fahrenheit (minus-11.5 Celsius) on March 18.
The normal high temperature for the day is around minus-56 Fahrenheit (minus-49 Celsius), which puts the March 18 reading at close to 70 degrees Fahrenheit (around 38 Celsius) warmer than normal.
***********
-
Yeah .. things are not going well.
Pandemic and other world events are also interfering our ability to deal with climate change now, to avoid more in the future.
Maybe we've just screwed things up for so long we won't make it?
-
Learning to live with it. The phrase is a euphemism for doing fuck all.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/apr/07/learning-live-covid-climate-breakdown-failing-government-flooding
-
I don't like the idea of relying so much on nuclear power. The waste is too dangerous and takes millennia to decay.
I like the idea of relying completely on renewable energy. I just found out you can harness energy from rain falling!
-
I may have said this before ....
I know several places where speculative developers are building private housing estates. One thing which just stands out is that on none of these developments is a single house where solar panels are being installed as a feature of their standard design.
Should it not be mandatory that ... where feasible ... all new construction should incorporate solar panels as standard?
-
I may have said this before ....
I know several places where speculative developers are building private housing estates. One thing which just stands out is that on none of these developments is a single house where solar panels are being installed as a feature of their standard design.
Should it not be mandatory that ... where feasible ... all new construction should incorporate solar panels as standard?
Yes, it should.
On an entirely unconnected issue, I wonder why construction companies donate to the Conservative Party?
https://www.housingtoday.co.uk/news/a-fifth-of-tory-party-donations-from-property-sector/5112738.article
-
I don't like the idea of relying so much on nuclear power. The waste is too dangerous and takes millennia to decay.
I like the idea of relying completely on renewable energy. I just found out you can harness energy from rain falling!
Yes hydroelectricity has been a thing for hundreds of years. Unfortunately, the UK doesn't have many suitable sites for large scale hydroelectric generation.
-
I thought I'd have some fun.
The average UK rainfall is about 1 metre per year (give or take, but 1 is an easy number to work with).
The average raindrop falls at about 14mph = about 6 m/s
So take a square kilometre of the UK. In one year 106 cubic metres of water fall on it at 6 m/s. A cubic metre has a mass of 1000 kg. So the total kinetic energy of rain falling on that square kilometre
is 1/2 mv2 = 0.5 x 109 x 6 x 6.
or 1.8 x 1010 joules.
That's 18 giga joules. Is that a lot?
It's 5000 kilowatt hours. It's not enough to run a one bar electric fire continuously for a year.
So, if you could capture all the kinetic energy from a whole square kilometres rainfall you could satisfactorily run one electric fire.
-
Yes hydroelectricity has been a thing for hundreds of years. Unfortunately, the UK doesn't have many suitable sites for large scale hydroelectric generation.
A reference to this I think rather than hydroelectricity
https://www.insidescience.org/news/how-much-power-can-we-get-raindrops (https://www.insidescience.org/news/how-much-power-can-we-get-raindrops)
-
Anyone know how much only having one bath a week would save?
-
Anyone know how much only having one bath a week would save?
If someone could design a way to re-direct used bath water to fill the toilet cistern, that would be cool. Bizarrely, on our allotment site they switched off the water supply to the toilets during the winter. A notice says, "please use the bucket and water from the water butt to flush".
-
Anyone know how much only having one bath a week would save?
Not as much as getting rid of the bath and installing a shower in its place.
-
Anyone know how much only having one bath a week would save?
Get a shower instead. If I didn't wash every day I'd pen and ink.
-
Solar energy storage....... https://tinyurl.com/ypuzs524
-
Anyone know how much only having one bath a week would save?
It would save me a fortune as my social life would be non existent.
(Actually that's a lie. I have a shower and one bath a week would increase my water consumption.)
-
It would save me a fortune as my social life would be non existent.
(Actually that's a lie. I have a shower and one bath a week would increase my water consumption.)
That's the first time I've seen the Religionethics forum described as a 'social life'.
-
That's the first time I've seen the Religionethics forum described as a 'social life'.
It's not the first time I've seen somebody who can't tell the difference between an online message board and a social life.
-
I may have said this before ....
I know several places where speculative developers are building private housing estates. One thing which just stands out is that on none of these developments is a single house where solar panels are being installed as a feature of their standard design.
Should it not be mandatory that ... where feasible ... all new construction should incorporate solar panels as standard?
Why would they include such features, or even suitable insulation, unless obliged to do so to meet building regulations?
I expect they make more money overall if they are added later and don't have to be considered in the design.
-
Why would they include such features, or even suitable insulation, unless obliged to do so to meet building regulations?
I expect they make more money overall if they are added later and don't have to be considered in the design.
Which is why I asked whether such additions should be made mandatory.
-
Why would they include such features, or even suitable insulation, unless obliged to do so to meet building regulations?
I expect they make more money overall if they are added later and don't have to be considered in the design.
The cost of the solar panels cannot be simply added to the price of the house. It takes something like 20 years for solar panels to pay for themselves (or did before the current energy price hike). Thus, adding £10k in solar panels to a new house won't add £10k to its selling price.
As HH implied, even if he didn't say explicitly, it would need to be the law that new builds must have solar panels.
-
Indeed. Make it mandatory.
However, the price of solar panels has fallen considerably over the last few years - at the kinds of costs builders pay together with the savings created by the scale of their operations - you might be talking about an additional building cost of £3000 - £4000 for ten to a dozen panel installation. This is dwarfed by the difference between the total cost of building a house and the amount a future purchaser will pay. But who knows, domestic electricity generation may make a house a more attractive purchase, particularly if it includes a 5kWh battery.
NB I am using my own experience of adding solar generation to my house when the IKEA scheme was operating.
-
I don't see how it can be made mandatory if it is unacceptable to the people that build the houses/buildings.
-
I don't see how it can be made mandatory if it is unacceptable to the people that build the houses/buildings.
Surely in the same way that any number of building regulations and standards are mandatory?
I'm sure some building companies want to get away with the bare minimum, or indeed supply unsuitable cladding for buildings, but I'm equally sure robust laws could be put into place to minimise the possibility of those things happening, or making sure certain types of heating/energy generation systems are installed.
-
Surely in the same way that any number of building regulations and standards are mandatory?
I'm sure some building companies want to get away with the bare minimum, or indeed supply unsuitable cladding for buildings, but I'm equally sure robust laws could be put into place to minimise the possibility of those things happening, or making sure certain types of heating/energy generation systems are installed.
If only things were that simple... but I see the link you provided referencing the contributions to the Conservatives by the construction companies is entirely "unconnected".
Even if robust legislation were to work within this country, climate change is a global issue and you would have to account for the consequent effects worldwide. Technology can certainly help us but has to be properly worked out for a connected world run under capitalist and/or nationalist regimes.
-
If only things were that simple... but I see the link you provided referencing the contributions to the Conservatives by the construction companies is entirely "unconnected".
Even if robust legislation were to work within this country, climate change is a global issue and you would have to account for the consequent effects worldwide. Technology can certainly help us but has to be properly worked out for a connected world run under capitalist and/or nationalist regimes.
I'm not saying it's likely under this current (mal)administration. I'm just pointing out that with political will it can be done. As to the global issue, maybe sometimes you just have to do the right thing and hope others will catch up eventually. Not entirely likely I'll grant you, but the alternative sounds like we wait for some worldwide consensus before we act. Well, I don't see that happening anytime soon with India or China, so we need to act.
-
I'm not saying it's likely under this current (mal)administration. I'm just pointing out that with political will it can be done. As to the global issue, maybe sometimes you just have to do the right thing and hope others will catch up eventually. Not entirely likely I'll grant you, but the alternative sounds like we wait for some worldwide consensus before we act. Well, I don't see that happening anytime soon with India or China, so we need to act.
We certainly do need to act, not enough time to wait for consensus .. indeed: "Think globally, act locally"
The good news is that all the materials needed to construct panels are available in manageable quantities (worldwide, ... batteries not so much). The problems relate to how we obtain, process and transport the materials. It's no good living here on solar energy, if it has caused further exploitation, poverty and inequality in other parts of the world - leading to people burning down forests in order to feed themselves.
Anyway, at home, if construction companies find they have to build in solar at extra cost that they can't make an immediate profit on on - what will they do? They would add it on as a mandatory - govt. required, cost - and who is going to vote for a government that will make all new house prices higher, given the current housing shambles?
-
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/07/15/weather/2050-uk-forecast-comes-true-in-2022/index.html
********
Two years ago, forecasters in the UK conducted an interesting thought experiment: What will our forecasts look like in 2050?
The climate crisis is pushing weather to the extreme all over the world, and temperatures in the northern latitudes have been particularly sensitive to these changes. So meteorologists at the UK Met Office -- the official weather forecast agency for the UK -- dove in to the super long-range climate models in the summer of 2020 to see what kind of temperatures they'd be forecasting in about three decades.
"Not actual weather forecast," the Met Office's graphics said. "Examples of plausible weather based on climate projections."
Well, on Monday and Tuesday, the "plausible" becomes reality -- 28 years early.
"Today, the forecast for Tuesday is shockingly almost identical for large parts of the country," Simon tweeted, adding in a later post that "what is coming on Tuesday gives an insight into the future."
In 30 years, this forecast will seem rather typical.
Temperatures are forecast to run 10 to 15 degrees warmer than normal early next week in the UK. Highs could approach 40 degrees Celsius (around 104 degrees Fahrenheit) for the first time -- a prediction that prompted meteorologists there to issue a "red" heat warning for the first time ever.
To be clear, this would be truly record-breaking heat. The country's hottest temperature ever measured was 38.7 degrees Celsius at the Cambridge Botanic Garden in 2019.
********
-
Apparently, this guy is at the extreme end of the opinion on climate change. So how come he sounds so right?
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jul/30/total-climate-meltdown-inevitable-heatwaves-global-catastrophe?
-
Apparently, this guy is at the extreme end of the opinion on climate change. So how come he sounds so right?
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jul/30/total-climate-meltdown-inevitable-heatwaves-global-catastrophe?
I don't think extreme climate change affirmers really help the cause.
-
I don't think extreme climate change affirmers really help the cause.
even if they were right?
-
I don't think extreme climate change affirmers really help the cause.
Part of his point is that we are seeing more extreme and unpredictable events, even than were forecast by his peers. That's why I think it feels:
1. correct.
2. Bloody unsettling.
3. Terrifying.
-
even if they were right?
All the other experts disagree with him, so they are probably right - and before you say "argumentum ad populum", it doesn't apply when we're talking about experts in a field.
-
I think it is very important to take climate change due to human activity seriously.
-
I think it is very important to take climate change due to human activity seriously.
True but I don't think anyone here disagrees with you.
-
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/lord-frost-urges-uk-to-ditch-renewable-energy-and-says-theres-no-evidence-world-is-facing-a-climate-emergency-332015/?
FFS
-
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/08/11/us/arctic-rapid-warming-climate/index.html
**************
As sea ice vanishes, Greenland melts and wildfires scorch the planet's northernmost forests, new research confirms what scientists are sounding alarms about: the Arctic has warmed much faster than the rest of the world in the past several decades.
The phenomenon, called Arctic amplification, is caused by the heat-trapping emissions from burning fossil fuels. The pace of the temperature increase around the North Pole in recent decades was four times higher than the rest of the planet, researchers at the Finnish Meteorological Institute found in a study published Thursday.
Another problem: Climate models, which scientists used to predict long-term change, are not capturing this high rate of warming, lead author and researcher Mika Rantanen told CNN, which was part of this study's motivation. That's concerning because if the models can't recreate what's happening right now, scientists can't be confident in their long-term predictions.
**************
-
This is from Yahoo, and is one of a series of photos illustrating the seriousness of the current drought, but this photo is misleading. The upper Ver, a few miles from me, is a Winterbourne which means it normally dries up in the summer. It would only have water in it at this time of year in an unusually wet summer.
-
The current wave of protestors/activists would do better to get down on their knees and pray for Russia, China, India and the US to be motivated to do whatever is needed to avert the oncoming catastrophe. Without these major polluters on board any efforts made by our own country will be insignificant.
-
The current wave of protestors/activists would do better to get down on their knees and pray for Russia, China, India and the US to be motivated to do whatever is needed to avert the oncoming catastrophe. Without these major polluters on board any efforts made by our own country will be insignificant.
Prayer isn't going to help, it is action that is required.
-
Prayer isn't going to help, it is action that is required.
Through prayer, God can motivate people into action.
In my 70+ years on this earth, one thing I have learnt is:
Never underestimate the power of prayer
-
Through prayer, God can motivate people into action.
In my 70+ years on this earth, one thing I have learnt is:
Never underestimate the power of prayer
Bold and 18pt too!
ETA: so if prayer is powerful and you and others have been prayering away over your 70+ years, it would be logical to think the world is much better now than ever. Do you think that? If not why not?
-
Bold and 18pt too!
ETA: so if prayer is powerful and you and others have been prayering away over your 70+ years, it would be logical to think the world is much better now than ever. Do you think that? If not why not?
This world is certainly a better place than it would have been without these extraordinary answers to prayer:
Saving Europe from being conquered by the forces of Ottoman empire against all the odds.
https://www.churchpop.com/2016/10/06/rosary-saved-christendom-extraordinary-miracle-lepanto/
The King's call for our nation to pray for a miraculous saving of the British army at Dunkirk.
https://www.goli.org.uk/post/80th-anniversary-of-the-nation-being-called-to-prayer
The Pope's intervention which helped save us from a nuclear war over the Cuban missile crisis.
https://www.crisismagazine.com/opinion/preventing-war-pope-john-xxiii-and-the-cuban-missile-crisis
And Christians all over the world have been praying for Ukraine to avoid being conquered by the might of the Russian army.
Yes, the world is a better place due to answers to prayer, but I am sure it would be a much better place if more people prayed for deliverance from the evils of this world.
-
This world is certainly a better place than it would have been without these extraordinary answers to prayer:
Saving Europe from being conquered by the forces of Ottoman empire against all the odds.
https://www.churchpop.com/2016/10/06/rosary-saved-christendom-extraordinary-miracle-lepanto/
The King's call for our nation to pray for a miraculous saving of the British army at Dunkirk.
https://www.goli.org.uk/post/80th-anniversary-of-the-nation-being-called-to-prayer
The Pope's intervention which helped save us from a nuclear war over the Cuban missile crisis.
https://www.crisismagazine.com/opinion/preventing-war-pope-john-xxiii-and-the-cuban-missile-crisis
And Christians all over the world have been praying for Ukraine to avoid being conquered by the might of the Russian army.
Yes, the world is a better place due to answers to prayer, but I am sure it would be a much better place if more people prayed for deliverance from the evils of this world.
The three C's.
Causation Correlation Confusion.
-
This world is certainly a better place than it would have been without these extraordinary answers to prayer:
Saving Europe from being conquered by the forces of Ottoman empire against all the odds.
https://www.churchpop.com/2016/10/06/rosary-saved-christendom-extraordinary-miracle-lepanto/
The King's call for our nation to pray for a miraculous saving of the British army at Dunkirk.
https://www.goli.org.uk/post/80th-anniversary-of-the-nation-being-called-to-prayer
The Pope's intervention which helped save us from a nuclear war over the Cuban missile crisis.
https://www.crisismagazine.com/opinion/preventing-war-pope-john-xxiii-and-the-cuban-missile-crisis
And Christians all over the world have been praying for Ukraine to avoid being conquered by the might of the Russian army.
Yes, the world is a better place due to answers to prayer, but I am sure it would be a much better place if more people prayed for deliverance from the evils of this world.
And yet you didn't answer the question. Nice to know your god gets the credit for Dunkirk but avouds the blane for the Holiocaust. Apart from just being a number of unevidenced assertions, your position is based on a built in 'logic' of cherry picking so your whole approach is empty.
-
This world is certainly a better place than it would have been without these extraordinary answers to prayer:
Saving Europe from being conquered by the forces of Ottoman empire against all the odds.
https://www.churchpop.com/2016/10/06/rosary-saved-christendom-extraordinary-miracle-lepanto/
The King's call for our nation to pray for a miraculous saving of the British army at Dunkirk.
https://www.goli.org.uk/post/80th-anniversary-of-the-nation-being-called-to-prayer
The Pope's intervention which helped save us from a nuclear war over the Cuban missile crisis.
https://www.crisismagazine.com/opinion/preventing-war-pope-john-xxiii-and-the-cuban-missile-crisis
And Christians all over the world have been praying for Ukraine to avoid being conquered by the might of the Russian army.
Yes, the world is a better place due to answers to prayer, but I am sure it would be a much better place if more people prayed for deliverance from the evils of this world.
No evidence that prayer played any part in any of that.
-
And yet you didn't answer the question. Nice to know your god gets the credit for Dunkirk but avouds the blane for the Holiocaust. Apart from just being a number of unevidenced assertions, your position is based on a built in 'logic' of cherry picking so your whole approach is empty.
The "question" you put to me was more a statement of your own scepticism which I was unable to endorse.
I responded in the only way I could by quoting profound examples of potential turning points in human history where millions of people were called to pray for a beneficial outcome. Had any one of them succumbed to the oppressive regimes which looked likely to succeed, we would be living in a world very different from the present state of freedom we all now enjoy. What they all had in common was that a desirable outcome seemed highly unlikely when contemplating the overwhelming advantages possessed by these oppressive regimes.
Regarding your comment on the Holocaust, the regime responsible for the Holocaust was ultimately defeated - and there were seven calls for national days of prayer, made by King George VI to help bring about this victory:
https://ctntp.files.wordpress.com/2017/12/seven-national-calls-to-prayer-in-wwii.pdf
In addition to my original statement:
Never underestimate the power of prayer
I should have also added:
Never underestimate the power of evil
-
The "question" you put to me was more a statement of your own scepticism which I was unable to endorse.
I responded in the only way I could by quoting profound examples of potential turning points in human history where millions of people were called to pray for a beneficial outcome. Had any one of them succumbed to the oppressive regimes which looked likely to succeed, we would be living in a world very different from the present state of freedom we all now enjoy. What they all had in common was that a desirable outcome seemed highly unlikely when contemplating the overwhelming advantages possessed by these oppressive regimes.
Regarding your comment on the Holocaust, the regime responsible for the Holocaust was ultimately defeated - and there were seven calls for national days of prayer, made by King George VI to help bring about this victory:
https://ctntp.files.wordpress.com/2017/12/seven-national-calls-to-prayer-in-wwii.pdf
In addition to my original statement:
Never underestimate the power of prayer
I should have also added:
Never underestimate the power of evil
No, here's the question again:
so if prayer is powerful and you and others have been prayering away over your 70+ years, it would be logical to think the world is much better now than ever. Do you think that? If not why not?
That is not a statement about my scepticism but a logical conclusion from your position and asking you if you agree with it. You haven't answered it.
If god is all knowing and all powetful and chose create the world this way, your god chose the evil that exists, chose to give it the power has and therefore chose to murder 6 million Jews, and that is the god you worship. It created the leakeamia that killed my cousin at 4 months, and you worship that. It chose for climate change to happen and you worship that.
-
Through prayer, God can motivate people into action.
In my 70+ years on this earth, one thing I have learnt is:
Never underestimate the power of prayer
I'm presuming that people have been praying for a cure for cancer - so how come I've got incurable cancer?
-
No, here's the question again:
so if prayer is powerful and you and others have been prayering away over your 70+ years, it would be logical to think the world is much better now than ever. Do you think that? If not why not?
The world is a much better place than it would have been without the prayers of millions of people.
That is not a statement about my scepticism but a logical conclusion from your position and asking you if you agree with it. You haven't answered it.
see above
If god is all knowing and all powetful and chose create the world this way, your god chose the evil that exists, chose to give it the power has and therefore chose to murder 6 million Jews, and that is the god you worship. It created the leakeamia that killed my cousin at 4 months, and you worship that. It chose for climate change to happen and you worship that.
I worship the God who gave me life and the power to choose my own destiny.
I worship the God who suffered and died in reparation for my sins and the sins of the whole world.
I worship the God who offers eternal salvation for my human soul
I worship the God who alone has the power to conquer evil
I worship the God who loves me
-
The world is a much better place than it would have been without the prayers of millions of people.see aboveI worship the God who gave me life and the power to choose my own destiny.
I worship the God who suffered and died in reparation for my sins and the sins of the whole world.
I worship the God who offers eternal salvation for my human soul
I worship the God who alone has the power to conquer evil
I worship the God who loves me
I note you again didn't answer the question.
You then put up a number of unevidenced assertions, and didn't deal with the issues in your own logic that I pointed out.
-
The world is a much better place than it would have been without the prayers of millions of people.see above I worship the God who gave me life and the power to choose my own destiny.
There is no evidence that prayer has done anything.
-
There is no evidence that prayer has done anything.
I think it have been CSLewis who said prayer doesn't change God, it changes us.
I wonder if the conclusion prayer hasn't dome anything comes as welcome second hand material.
I also wonder people are averse to it for fear of divine revelation.
-
I think it have been CSLewis who said prayer doesn't change God, it changes us.
I wonder if the conclusion prayer hasn't dome anything comes as welcome second hand material.
I also wonder people are averse to it for fear of divine revelation.
So you are saying that you disagree with Alan Burns idea of the effects of prayer.
-
As we lurch from crisis to crisis - pandemic, climate change, war, terrorism, global energy costs ....
Our increasingly secular society turns away from the one source of divine help.
We cannot call upon God's miraculous intervention when we turn our backs to Him.
Now more than ever - the world needs to repent and turn back to the God who brought everything into being and the only one who can save us.
-
So you are saying that you disagree with Alan Burns idea of the effects of prayer.
here is the quote:
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/1005539-i-pray-because-i-can-t-help-myself-i-pray-because
-
here is the quote:
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/1005539-i-pray-because-i-can-t-help-myself-i-pray-because
Not sure why you have posted the quote. Are ypu saying that you agree with it, in which case there are no miracle cures?
-
As we lurch from crisis to crisis - pandemic, climate change, war, terrorism, global energy costs ....
Our increasingly secular society turns away from the one source of divine help.
We cannot call upon God's miraculous intervention when we turn our backs to Him.
Now more than ever - the world needs to repent and turn back to the God who brought everything into being and the only one who can save us.
Ok, so now you are saying that despite all the praying the world is getting worse. When was it at its best in your opinion?
-
I think it have been CSLewis who said prayer doesn't change God, it changes us.
I wonder if the conclusion prayer hasn't dome anything comes as welcome second hand material.
I also wonder people are averse to it for fear of divine revelation.
Not sure what 'as welcome second hand material' means - however, there is no evidence that prayer has done anything. People who pray may behave differently to those who don't. Belief in the power of prayer may mean people behave differently. But that is different from saying prayer has an effect.
-
As we lurch from crisis to crisis - pandemic, climate change, war, terrorism, global energy costs ....
Our increasingly secular society turns away from the one source of divine help.
We cannot call upon God's miraculous intervention when we turn our backs to Him.
Now more than ever - the world needs to repent and turn back to the God who brought everything into being and the only one who can save us.
And that ends today's sermon.
-
As we lurch from crisis to crisis - pandemic, climate change, war, terrorism, global energy costs ....
Our increasingly secular society turns away from the one source of divine help.
We cannot call upon God's miraculous intervention when we turn our backs to Him.
Now more than ever - the world needs to repent and turn back to the God who brought everything into being and the only one who can save us.
There have been very few proper studies looking at the effect of prayer. And any that do so have to be designed to take account of the psychological impact of people knowing they are being prayed for - which isn't anything to do with 'god' intervening.
So there is certainly one major study that has been properly designed - this involved patients recovering from cardiac surgery and looking at the incidence of post operative complications. There were three groups:
1. This group did not receive prayer
2. This group did receive prayer but weren't told that they had received it
3. This group did receive prayer and were aware of this
Groups 1 and 2 were both told that they may or may not receive prayer, but were not aware which group they were in.
The complication rates for groups 1 and 2 were the same demonstrating that prayer does not work. Group 3 had statistically greater complication rates, indicating that knowledge of being prayer for had a negative effect in this case, presumable due to the psychological impact that being told you were being prayed for had on persecution of seriousness of the condition.
-
There have been very few proper studies looking at the effect of prayer. And any that do so have to be designed to take account of the psychological impact of people knowing they are being prayed for - which isn't anything to do with 'god' intervening.
So the is certainly one major study that has been properly designed - this involved patients recovering from cardiac surgery and looking at the incidence of post operative complications. There were three groups:
1. This group did not receive prayer
2. This group did receive prayer but weren't told that they had received it
3. This group did receive prayer and were aware of this
Groups 1 and 2 were both told that they may or may not receive prayer, but were not aware which group they were in.
The complication rates for groups 1 and 2 were the same demonstrating that prayer does not work. Group 3 had statistically greater complication rates, indicating that knowledge of being prayer for had a negative effect in this case, presumable due to the psychological impact that being told you were being prayed for had on persecution of seriousness of the condition.
Naturalistic methods examining supernatural claims are a category error.
-
Naturalistic methods examining supernatural claims are a category error.
Is that the case here - the two things being looked at - the prayer itself and the clinical outcomes are both clearly naturalistic. Sure there is a claim of supernatural stuff between, but I don't think that is what is actually being looked at in the study, which is looking at whether a naturalistic event (people praying for someone else) has a significant effect on another naturalistic event (clinical complications following surgery). The study, of course, needs to be designed to counter any psychological placebo or nocebo effects - but these are both also naturalistic.
Ultimately I don't see why this is different to studying whether homeopathic interventions work - the question being asked isn't how they work (which might stray into supernatural territory) but whether they work (which stays firmly on naturalistic grounds).
-
Is that the case here - the two things being looked at - the prayer itself and the clinical outcomes are both clearly naturalistic. Sure there is a claim of supernatural stuff between, but I don't think that is what is actually being looked at in the study, which is looking at whether a naturalistic event (people praying for someone else) has a significant effect on another naturalistic event (clinical complications following surgery). The study, of course, needs to be designed to counter any psychological placebo or nocebo effects - but these are both also naturalistic.
Ultimately I don't see why this is different to studying whether homeopathic interventions work - the question being asked isn't how they work (which might stray into supernatural territory) but whether they work (which stays firmly on naturalistic grounds).
Homeopathic claims are naturalistic - ergo you show the effect doesn't happen. Supernaturalistic claims are not about the effect itself but about things only being that good because of it. It breaks cause and effect. See Alan Burns posts here.
-
Homeopathic claims are naturalistic - ergo you show the effect doesn't happen. Supernaturalistic claims are not about the effect itself but about things only being that good because of it. It breaks cause and effect. See Alan Burns posts here.
Not sure I agree - if you are unable to determine that naturalistic event A (someone praying for someone else or someone taking a substance that has been diluted so far that there cannot be active ingredient left) has an impact on naturalistic event B (some clinical outcome), then there is no point in going any further to try to determine 'why' it has an effect.
And those who think that prayer work, consider that on the basis of both the cause/effect and the supernatural mechanism. If the former isn't demonstrated then the latter is moot.
-
Homeopathic claims are naturalistic ...
Are they - I would have thought they go beyond naturalistic as the claim is that something has an effect when it isn't there - that sounds pretty supernatural to me.
-
Not sure I agree - if you are unable to determine that naturalistic event A (someone praying for someone else or someone taking a substance that has been diluted so far that there cannot be active ingredient left) has an impact on naturalistic event B (some clinical outcome), then there is no point in going any further to try to determine 'why' it has an effect.
And those who think that prayer work, consider that on the basis of both the cause/effect and the supernatural mechanism. If the former isn't demonstrated then the latter is moot.
Again category error. Look at Alan's claims - the world is better vs less prayer. Good things happen because of prayer. Less bad things happen.
-
Are they - I would have thought they go beyond naturalistic as the claim is that something has an effect when it isn't there - that sounds pretty supernatural to me.
Then you have no knowledge of homeopathic claims. They are about things that they say are there.
-
Then you have no knowledge of homeopathic claims. They are about things that they say are there.
Supernatural - phenomena or entities that are beyond the laws of nature.
Homeopathy seems largely to be based on claims of water memory:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_memory
'Water memory contradicts current scientific understanding of physical chemistry and is generally not accepted by the scientific community.'
I would have thought that water memory is a supernatural claim as it contradicts the laws of nature and therefore to be accepted requires that the phenomenon operates beyond the laws of nature.
-
Supernatural - phenomena or entities that are beyond the laws of nature.
Homeopathy seems largely to be based on claims of water memory:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_memory
'Water memory contradicts current scientific understanding of physical chemistry and is generally not accepted by the scientific community.'
I would have thought that water memory is a supernatural claim as it contradicts the laws of nature and therefore to be accepted requires that the phenomenon operates beyond the laws of nature.
You and Vlad seem to have a similar issue here in that supernatural is defined by being outside of 'laws' you accept. Homeopathy claims are about the 'laws' you accept being wrong. Miracle claims are about breaking those laws. Hence category error.
-
Again category error. Look at Alan's claims - the world is better vs less prayer. Good things happen because of prayer. Less bad things happen.
AB's claims are, of course, vague, ill-defined and unevidenced.
But nonetheless, on the most basic level the phenomenon of people praying is a clearly naturalistic things. Likewise assessment of good vs bad stuff going on in the world is also naturalistic, if at times highly subjective. But in some cases the effects are clearly objective and measurable - e.g. clinical outcomes, global temperatures.
So in simple terms ABs claim that more prayer will result in less global warming is an entirely naturalistic claim of cause and effect. Very difficult to study, I grant you, but nonetheless perfectly amenable in principle to naturalistic methods of study. His claimed mechanism for the cause/effect isn't amenable to naturalistic method, but that is pretty well irrelevant until/unless you demonstrate a cause/effect and further that you are unable to explain that cause/effect through naturalistic phenomena.
-
Homeopathy claims are about the 'laws' you accept being wrong. Miracle claims are about breaking those laws.
You say potato, I say potato - hmm, doesn't work in text!
But you get what I am saying - there is no fundamental dividing line between a claim of 'your laws are wrong' and 'I'm breaking those laws' - largely they would be used one or the other on the basis of the person making the claim and the point they wish to make.
As far as I'm concerned water memory can only work if it breaks the laws of chemistry, so is a supernatural claim. Just like the claim that a god can intervene in the world. Both are, as I see it, supernatural claims as they contradict the laws of nature.
-
AB's claims are, of course, vague, ill-defined and unevidenced.
But nonetheless, on the most basic level the phenomenon of people praying is a clearly naturalistic things. Likewise assessment of good vs bad stuff going on in the world is also naturalistic, if at times highly subjective. But in some cases the effects are clearly objective and measurable - e.g. clinical outcomes, global temperatures.
So in simple terms ABs claim that more prayer will result in less global warming is an entirely naturalistic claim of cause and effect. Very difficult to study, I grant you, but nonetheless perfectly amenable in principle to naturalistic methods of study. His claimed mechanism for the cause/effect isn't amenable to naturalistic method, but that is pretty well irrelevant until/unless you demonstrate a cause/effect and further that you are unable to explain that cause/effect through naturalistic phenomena.
And you and Alan fall into the same category error but from different sides
Let's say for example that Alan made a claim that his praying made climate change less worse, and after measuring you found that he'd prayed, and climate change was less worse than you had thought it was going to be - is there a chance in valhalla you would attibute it to thd praying?
What claims like Alan's are is that without the prayer it would be worse. Even dignifying that with a response that says you haven't proved it is a category error (and yes,I have made that error)
-
You say potato, I say potato - hmm, doesn't work in text!
But you get what I am saying - there is no fundamental dividing line between a claim of 'your laws are wrong' and 'I'm breaking those laws' - largely they would be used one or the other on the basis of the person making the claim and the point they wish to make.
As far as I'm concerned water memory can only work if it breaks the laws of chemistry, so is a supernatural claim. Just like the claim that a god can intervene in the world. Both are, as I see it, supernatural claims as they contradict the laws of nature.
As so often, you use your subjective ideas as objective.
-
Let's say for example that Alan made a claim that his praying made climate change less worse, and after measuring you found that he'd prayed, and climate change was less worse than you had thought it was going to be - is there a chance in valhalla you would attibute it to thd praying?
If the study was properly conducted and controlled, yes I would say that a causal relationship between the act of someone praying and the climate change had been demonstrated. That isn't the same as assuming we know the mechanism and it would be completely wrong to ascribe that, without thought, to god.
The cardiac surgery study is interesting in this respect. It found that prayer had no effect, when the person being prayed for did not know whether or not they were being prayed for. This is the equivalent of a blinded placebo study. However the study found that there were greater complications when the patients were told they were being prayed for. Does this mean we should automatically accept that god has it in for people recovering from cardiac surgery? Of course not, as we have a perfectly well established psychological explanation to fall back on - in this case the nocebo effect.
There are plenty of perfectly naturalistic ways in which prayer could impact climate change. For example people may feel motivated or inspired by their own prayer or known prayer of others to make a difference by changing behaviours. Alternatively prayer could result in people thinking they'd done something, when they'd done nothing, or that they had left it to god to intervene through their prayers making matters worse.
But the fundamental point is that trying to determine the mechanism between a cause and effect is completely pointless until you've demonstrated that there is a cause and effect.
-
If the study was properly conducted and controlled, yes I would say that a causal relationship between the act of someone praying and the climate change had been demonstrated. That isn't the same as assuming we know the mechanism and it would be completely wrong to ascribe that, without thought, to god.
The cardiac surgery study is interesting in this respect. It found that prayer had no effect, when the person being prayed for did not know whether or not they were being prayed for. This is the equivalent of a blinded placebo study. However the study found that there were greater complications when the patients were told they were being prayed for. Does this mean we should automatically accept that god has it in for people recovering from cardiac surgery? Of course not, as we have a perfectly well established psychological explanation to fall back on - in this case the nocebo effect.
There are plenty of perfectly naturalistic ways in which prayer could impact climate change. For example people may feel motivated or inspired by their own prayer or known prayer of others to make a difference by changing behaviours. Alternatively prayer could result in people thinking they'd done something, when they'd done nothing, or that they had left it to god to intervene through their prayers making matters worse.
But the fundamental point is that trying to determine the mechanism between a cause and effect is completely pointless until you've demonstrated that there is a cause and effect.
And s supernatural claim is that there is no connection between cause and effect as you are looking at it there - so again category error.
Edited
-
As so often, you use your subjective ideas as objective.
Not really - it can be completely objectively demonstrate both theoretically and experimentally that most vials of homeopathic solutions contain no active ingredient molecules at all.
And once the placebo effect is factored out, guess what, they don't work. Nothing subjective about that at all.
-
Not really - it can be completely objectively demonstrate both theoretically and experimentally that most vials of homeopathic solutions contain no active ingredient molecules at all.
And once the placebo effect is factored out, guess what, they don't work. Nothing subjective about that at all.
'Completely objective' is laughable. We are subjective.
-
And s supernatural claim is that there connection between cause and effect as you are looking at it there - so again category error.
I think you are scrambling your words.
But no - I'm not looking to investigate supernatural claims using naturalistic methods. No I am investigating the cause/effect relationship between two naturalistic things, namely the act of someone praying and clinical outcomes/global warming. Nothing supernatural in any of these. It is only those that wish to overlay supernatural mechanisms that get into problems - I'm not doing that.
-
I think you are scrambling your words.
But no - I'm not looking to investigate supernatural claims using naturalistic methods. No I am investigating the cause/effect relationship between two naturalistic things, namely the act of someone praying and clinical outcomes/global warming. Nothing supernatural in any of these. It is only those that wish to overlay supernatural mechanisms that get into problems - I'm not doing that.
See updated post
-
'Completely objective' is laughable. We are subjective.
So the notion of molarity, molecular weight, Avogadro's number etc is simply subjective 'true for me, but no true for you' stuff NS? I think you've been on the homeopathic coolaid diluted to the extent that you bottle contains only water.
-
So the notion of molarity, molecular weight, Avogadro's number etc is simply subjective 'true for me, but no true for you' stuff NS? I think you've been on the homeopathic coolaid diluted to the extent that you bottle contains only water.
Those are intersubjective. If you think you've managed to solve the problem of hard solipsism, on you go and show it.
-
And s supernatural claim is that there is no connection between cause and effect as you are looking at it there - so again category error.
Edited
Nope still makes no sense.
Until and unless there is valid demonstration that naturalistic action x causes naturalistic effect y there is no supernatural claim to even look at. If it is determined that x causes y then we can look at mechanism, which would obviously involve looking at naturalistic mechanisms that may link cause and effect, in the case in point to look at human behaviours and psychology, which are naturalistic.
-
Nope still makes no sense.
Until and unless there is valid demonstration that naturalistic action x causes naturalistic effect y there is no supernatural claim to even look at. If it is determined that x causes y then we can look at mechanism, which would obviously involve looking at naturalistic mechanisms that may link cause and effect, in the case in point to look at human behaviours and psychology, which are naturalistic.
Let's take this very slowly for you. I'm not, and did not claim that there was a supernatural cause evidenced. Got that?
It's about the whole thing being a category error.
You using naturalistic methodology, which is what I use, is useful when we assume naturalism .
When someone makes a supernatural claim, this doesn't work because any outcome can be caused by any effect.
Got it?
-
Let's take this very slowly for you. I'm not, and did not claim that there was a supernatural cause evidenced. Got that?
It's about the whole thing being a category error.
You using naturalistic methodology, which is what I use, is useful when we assume naturalism .
When someone makes a supernatural claim, this doesn't work because any outcome can be caused by any effect.
Got it?
Nope - you are getting is completely haywire.
Let me make it simple.
AB conflates two claims into one when he make the following kind of statement:
When we pray god intervenes to reduce climate change - or
When we pray god helps people recover from cardiac surgery
Those two claims are firstly
Prayer causes an alteration in climate change - or
Prayer causes an improvement in recovery from cardiac surgery
And a second claim about the mechanism of action, namely
The mechanism is due to intervention by god
But the second claim is completely irrelevant until or unless the first claim is proven, and the first claim makes no assumption of mechanism (whether natural or supernatural) merely there is an assumption of a causal relation between two things both of which are naturalistic, specifically people praying and climate change/cardiac surgery recovery.
So the first claim is entirely within the realms of naturalistic methods to assess. If it is proven that there is a causal relationship then, and only then, might we want to move onto looking at the mechanism. But here again we do not assume supernatural mechanistic claims, but naturalistic ones, as these the only ones we have methods to assess.
So on recovery from cardiac surgery we can look at psychological mechanisms associated with placebo, nocebo effects - this is what the study I mentioned did and found clear evidence of a psychological nocebo effect. For climate change we can look at personal motivations/actions etc that might be linked to people praying. Now I'm not saying this would be easy science, but it isn't impossible.
So we aren't in the territory of assessing supernatural claims using naturalistic methods. The first type of claims are entirely naturalistic, the second could have a supernatural claim associated with them, but we would restrict ourselves to assessing alternative naturalistic claims as these are the only ones amenable to the methods we have available.
-
Nope - you are getting is completely haywire.
Let me make it simple.
AB conflates two claims into one when he make the following kind of statement:
When we pray god intervenes to reduce climate change - or
When we pray god helps people recover from cardiac surgery
Those two claims are firstly
Prayer causes an alteration in climate change - or
Prayer causes an improvement in recovery from cardiac surgery
And a second claim about the mechanism of action, namely
The mechanism is due to intervention by god
But the second claim is completely irrelevant until or unless the first claim is proven, and the first claim makes no assumption of mechanism (whether natural or supernatural) merely there is an assumption of a causal relation between two things both of which are naturalistic, specifically people praying and climate change/cardiac surgery recovery.
So the first claim is entirely within the realms of naturalistic methods to assess. If it is proven that there is a causal relationship then, and only then, might we want to move onto looking at the mechanism. But here again we do not assume supernatural mechanistic claims, but naturalistic ones, as these the only ones we have methods to assess.
So on recovery from cardiac surgery we can look at psychological mechanisms associated with placebo, nocebo effects - this is what the study I mentioned did and found clear evidence of a psychological nocebo effect. For climate change we can look at personal motivations/actions etc that might be linked to people praying. Now I'm not saying this would be easy science, but it isn't impossible.
So we aren't in the territory of assessing supernatural claims using naturalistic methods. The first type of claims are entirely naturalistic, the second could have a supernatural claim associated with them, but we would restrict ourselves to assessing alternative naturalistic claims as these are the only ones amenable to the methods we have available.
Prolixity is not an argument. If all possible outcomes are possible under supernatural arguments, no putcome is useful in judging. That doesn't mean that you can't argue that if someone says if X, then Y is wrong if it doesn't happen but all it shows is that claim is wrong.
-
Prolixity is not an argument.
I am trying to spell it out simply and clearly - but you seem unable, or unwilling, to follow a pretty simple argument.
If all possible outcomes are possible under supernatural arguments, no putcome is useful in judging.
Sure - we can all cry 'magic' to explain cause/effect. But that is irrelevant if the staring point isn't proven - i.e. there is a cause and effect relationship. If there is a cause/effect relationship then we need to move on to look at mechanisms using methods available to us. If we find a mechanism that seems to fit the bill then that would seem to be the most plausible explanation. Of course people can still cry 'but it's still magic', but their pleading becomes increasingly easy to ignore the more evidence arises that a naturalistic mechanism explains the cause/effect relationship.
-
I am trying to spell it out simply and clearly - but you seem unable, or unwilling, to follow a pretty simple argument.
Sure - we can all cry 'magic' to explain cause/effect. But that is irrelevant if the staring point isn't proven - i.e. there is a cause and effect relationship. If there is a cause/effect relationship then we need to move on to look at mechanisms using methods available to us. If we find a mechanism that seems to fit the bill then that would seem to be the most plausible explanation. Of course people can still cry 'but it's still magic', but their pleading becomes increasingly easy to ignore the more evidence arises that a naturalistic mechanism explains the cause/effect relationship.
You're nearly there. Anyone who uses supernatural is using an approach where logic is worthless.
-
Interesting article contrasting Delhi & Oxford:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/nov/15/delhi-climate-catastrophe-oxford-britain-crisis
-
You're nearly there.
Blimey - you can be a patronising old b****r when you want to be NS.
Anyone who uses supernatural is using an approach where logic is worthless.
I am well aware that trying to argue for or against supernatural claims is a fools errand as we have no method to assess the validity of such claims so cannot prove them either true or false.
Which is precisely why I have been focussing on naturalistic claims which can be tested. So firstly whether naturalistic event x (e.g. someone praying) has a causal relationship with naturalistic event y (e.g. alteration in climate change or complications for surgery). If there is no cause/effect then we can put aside any further investigation. If there is we will investigate potential mechanisms that are also able to be assessed through naturalistic methods. For example looking for evidence of placebo/nocebo effects or changes in human behaviours that could be ascribed to prayer.
-
It is all probably about the common consciousness. I know it is speculative but this is what the secular philosophical position is all about.
The effects of prayer, collective meditations and so on work through the common consciousness. When people collectively pray or meditate they cause changes in the common consciousness which can probably produce changes in the external world.
The reason why testing of such effects through clinical trials don't show up positive results is because the process does not retain its spontaneous nature.
In any case I think we can have a separate thread on the effects of prayer.
-
The effects of prayer, collective meditations and so on ...
Now you are going down the same route as AM - presuming that prayer etc has an effect. That first needs to be demonstrated before moving on to trying to understand the mechanism by which it works. Certainly in terms of intercessional prayer there is no evidence that it has any effect as long as the studies are designed to eliminate the well established placebo/nocebo effects.
.. work through the common consciousness. When people collectively pray or meditate they cause changes in the common consciousness which can probably produce changes in the external world.
Unevidenced non-sense and give the evidence that prayer doesn't actually have any effect beyond placebo/nocebo then you are ascribing mechanisms to effect that have not been demonstrated to exist.
The reason why testing of such effects through clinical trials don't show up positive results is because the process does not retain its spontaneous nature.
Well you'd better take that up with AB as his examples include situations where people have been asked to pray for a particular outcome (i.e. non spontaneous) and certainly in christianity there is a well established element of directed prayer - indeed it exists in every christian service.
But you are also engaging in special pleading - the cardiac complications study is pretty well equivalent to the examples AB gave (which he claimed, without evidence had an effect) - in other words people being asked to pray for someone else to achieve an outcome. And once the placebo (or in this case nocebo) effect was designed out of the study guess what effect prayer had on the outcome being prayed for - zip, nada, nothing.
-
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/dec/29/no-such-thing-freak-weather-2023-storm-elliott
Sobering reading. Yet again.
-
Blimey - you can be a patronising old b****r when you want to be NS.
I am well aware that trying to argue for or against supernatural claims is a fools errand as we have no method to assess the validity of such claims so cannot prove them either true or false.
Which is precisely why I have been focussing on naturalistic claims which can be tested. So firstly whether naturalistic event x (e.g. someone praying) has a causal relationship with naturalistic event y (e.g. alteration in climate change or complications for surgery). If there is no cause/effect then we can put aside any further investigation. If there is we will investigate potential mechanisms that are also able to be assessed through naturalistic methods. For example looking for evidence of placebo/nocebo effects or changes in human behaviours that could be ascribed to prayer.
Have you seen the film Hacksaw Ridge? It's about 7th day Adventist Desmond Doss who during WW2 rescued 75 wounded men trapped at the top of an escarpment by lowering them with a special knot he knew. He said afterwards that after rescuing each one, he prayed, "help me get one more".
-
Time lapse video of blizzard...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5cFeUmYu98
-
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/02/21/world/antarctic-sea-ice-record-low-climate-intl/index.html
**********
Climate models projected declines in Antarctic sea ice that were similar to the Arctic, but until recently the region was behaving completely differently than those models predicted.
It hit a record high for winter sea ice extent in 2014 when it reached 7.76 million square miles, which seemed to support the idea that the Antarctic may be relatively insulated from global warming.
But in 2016, something changed. Scientists began observing a steep downward trend.
At first, some put it down to the usual variability of this vastly complex continent, with its diverse, intertwined climate systems. But after two low sea ice records in a row, scientists are becoming concerned.
“The question is, has climate change reached Antarctica? Is this the beginning of the end? Will the sea ice disappear for good in the coming years in the summer?” Christian Haas, head of the Sea Ice Physics Research Section at the Alfred Wegener Institute in Germany, told CNN.
**********
-
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-65339934
******************
A recent, rapid heating of the world's oceans has alarmed scientists concerned that it will add to global warming.
This month, the global sea surface hit a new record high temperature. It has never warmed this much, this quickly.
Scientists don't fully understand why this has happened.
But they worry that, combined with other weather events, the world's temperature could reach a concerning new level by the end of next year.
A coastal El Niño has already developed off the shores of Peru and Ecuador and experts believe a fully formed event will follow with implications for global temperatures.
"If a new El Niño new comes on top of it, we will probably have additional global warming of 0.2-0.25C," said Dr Josef Ludescher, from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Research.
"The impact on the temperature is relaxed a few months after the peak of any El Niño so this is why 2024 will be probably the warmest on record."
"And we may, we will be close to 1.5C days and perhaps we will temporarily go over."
El Niño will likely disrupt weather patterns around the world, weaken the monsoon and threaten more wildfires in Australia.
But there are more fundamental worries that as more heat goes into the ocean, the waters may be less able to store excess energy.
And there are concerns that the heat contained in the oceans won't stay there.
Several scientists contacted for this story were reluctant to go on the record about the implications.
******************
-
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/05/17/world/global-warming-breach-wmo-climate-intl/index.html
**********
The world is now likely to breach a key climate threshold for the first time within the next five years, according to the World Meteorological Organization, due to a combination of heat-trapping pollution and a looming El Niño.
Global temperatures have soared in recent years as the world continues to burn planet-warming fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas. And that trend shows no sign of slowing. In its annual climate update, the WMO said that between 2023 and 2027, there is now a 66% chance that the planet’s temperature will climb above 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming above pre-industrial levels for at least one year.
As temperatures surge, there is also a 98% likelihood that at least one of the next five years – and the five-year period as a whole – will be the warmest on record for the planet, the WMO reported.
Breaching the 1.5-degree threshold may only be temporary, the WMO said, but it would be the clearest signal yet of how quickly climate change is accelerating – hastening sea level rise, more extreme weather and the demise of vital ecosystems.
**********
-
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/06/17/world/four-climate-charts-extreme-weather-heat-oceans/index.html
**********
Soaring temperatures. Unusually hot oceans. Record high levels of carbon pollution in the atmosphere and record low levels of Antarctic ice.
We’re only halfway through 2023 and so many climate records are being broken, some scientists are sounding the alarm, fearing it could be a sign of a planet warming much more rapidly than expected.
In a widely shared tweet, Brian McNoldy, senior research associate at the University of Miami Rosenstiel School of Marine, Atmospheric and Earth Science, called rising ocean and air temperatures “totally bonkers.”
He added, “people who look at this stuff routinely can’t believe their eyes. Something very weird is happening.”
Other scientists have said while the records are alarming, they are not unexpected due to both the continued rise of planet-heating pollution and the arrival of the natural climate phenomenon El Niño, which has a global heating effect.
Whether the broken records are a sign of climate change progressing beyond what climate the models predict, or are the outcome of the climate crisis unfolding as expected, they remain a very concerning signal of what’s to come, scientists said.
“These changes are deeply disturbing because of what they mean for people this coming summer, and every summer after, until we cut our carbon emissions at a much faster pace than we’re currently doing,” Jennifer Marlon, research scientist at Yale School of the Environment, told CNN.
The world is already 1.2 degrees Celsius warmer than it was in preindustrial times, and the next five years are predicted to be the hottest on record.
“We’ve been saying this for a long time – as polar scientists and as climate scientists – we’ve been saying you can count on the next few decades to consistently get warmer,”
**********
-
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/07/07/world/global-temps-warmest-on-record-climate/index.html
***********
The planet’s temperature soared again on Thursday to levels not seen in the modern record-keeping era, marking the fourth straight day of record temperatures. These alarming new records are likely the highest temperatures in “at least 100,000 years,” one scientist told CNN.
The global average daily temperature climbed to 17.23 degrees Celsius (63.01 degrees Fahrenheit) on Thursday, according to the University of Maine’s Climate Reanalyzer, which uses data from the US National Centers for Environmental Prediction.
It’s been a week of record-breaking temperatures. On Monday, the average global temperature reached 17.01 degrees Celsius (62.62 degrees Fahrenheit), the highest in the NCEP’s data, which goes back to 1979. On Tuesday it climbed to 17.18 degrees Celsius, where it remained on Wednesday.
************
-
Scary graphs
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-66229065
-
... and Earth Overshoot Day 2nd of August this year....... https://www.overshootday.org/newsroom/past-earth-overshoot-days/
-
I think I may need help. I find myself largely in agreement with Seldom Glummer:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jul/25/labour-urged-to-work-with-tories-to-counter-ignorant-climate-policy-attacks
-
I think I may need help. I find myself largely in agreement with Seldom Glummer:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jul/25/labour-urged-to-work-with-tories-to-counter-ignorant-climate-policy-attacks
The reactions to the Uxbridge by election result does not bode well for any such cooperation
-
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/07/25/world/gulf-stream-atlantic-current-collapse-climate-scn-intl/index.html
*************
A vital system of ocean currents could collapse within a few decades if the world continues to pump out planet-heating pollution, scientists are warning – an event that would be catastrophic for global weather and “affect every person on the planet.”
A new study published Tuesday in the journal Nature, found that the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Current – of which the Gulf Stream is a part – could collapse around the middle of the century, or even as early as 2025.
Scientists uninvolved with this study told CNN the exact tipping point for the critical system is uncertain, and that measurements of the currents have so far showed little trend or change. But they agreed these results are alarming and provide new evidence that the tipping point could occur sooner than previously thought.
*************
-
The need for vacations....
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/07/27/opinions/climate-crisis-fires-heat-summer-vacations-mcguire/index.html
*************
As wildfires, driven by record-breaking heat, tinder-box conditions and strong winds, raged across the islands of Rhodes, Corfu and Evia, thousands of visitors, along with residents, had to flee the flames — many with just the clothes they were wearing.
It would be a big mistake to regard these as freak events and to continue holidaying as usual in the years ahead. On the contrary, the extreme weather conditions across southern Europe this summer are a wake-up call — a reminder that not even our vacations are insulated from the growing consequences of global heating.
This view is reinforced by a new study published earlier this week which showed that both the European and North American heatwaves would have been all but impossible without climate change.
The events of the last week in the Greek Islands should, then, give us pause for thought, not only about whether we should any longer be flying on holiday to places that may threaten us and our loved ones — but about the whole point of having a holiday.
For many of us, jetting off every year on a foreign break has almost become instinctive — just something we do without really thinking about it.
If southern Europe is out of bounds due to increasing heat, then the tendency for many will be to find somewhere else that looks — on the face of it at least — less risky. But this isn’t the answer.
Climate breakdown is set to become all-pervasive and affect every aspect of our lives and livelihoods, and already extreme weather can happen pretty much anywhere. So, what to do?
Last year, UK residents made more than 46 million trips to go on holiday abroad. This can’t go on, nor should it, both for the peace of mind of holiday-makers increasingly worried about growing extreme weather, and for the good of the planet.
*************
-
The need for vacations....
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/07/27/opinions/climate-crisis-fires-heat-summer-vacations-mcguire/index.html
*************
As wildfires, driven by record-breaking heat, tinder-box conditions and strong winds, raged across the islands of Rhodes, Corfu and Evia, thousands of visitors, along with residents, had to flee the flames — many with just the clothes they were wearing.
It would be a big mistake to regard these as freak events and to continue holidaying as usual in the years ahead. On the contrary, the extreme weather conditions across southern Europe this summer are a wake-up call — a reminder that not even our vacations are insulated from the growing consequences of global heating.
This view is reinforced by a new study published earlier this week which showed that both the European and North American heatwaves would have been all but impossible without climate change.
The events of the last week in the Greek Islands should, then, give us pause for thought, not only about whether we should any longer be flying on holiday to places that may threaten us and our loved ones — but about the whole point of having a holiday.
For many of us, jetting off every year on a foreign break has almost become instinctive — just something we do without really thinking about it.
If southern Europe is out of bounds due to increasing heat, then the tendency for many will be to find somewhere else that looks — on the face of it at least — less risky. But this isn’t the answer.
Climate breakdown is set to become all-pervasive and affect every aspect of our lives and livelihoods, and already extreme weather can happen pretty much anywhere. So, what to do?
Last year, UK residents made more than 46 million trips to go on holiday abroad. This can’t go on, nor should it, both for the peace of mind of holiday-makers increasingly worried about growing extreme weather, and for the good of the planet.
*************
I think there are a lot of issues here.
First - with climate change it is quite likely that the most 'attractive' time for people to visit the med will shift from July/August to other times when the weather will be more amenable. This happens with other parts of the world now with current climate patterns - people for example being less likely to visit the Caribbean during the hurricane season.
Then there is the point that tourism is a major (often the major) contributor to the economy of many of these places. So if tourism stops how will the economy of, for example, small Greek islands, manage.
But the fundamental point is the question 'should we be travelling long distances' - and this is the nub of the issue. It seems to me to be a perfectly legitimate desire to want to see the Grand Canyon if you live in London ... or witness the Northern lights is you are from India ... or visit Stonehenge if you are from Toronto etc etc. Now there are no realistic ways in which you could achieve any of those 'bucket list' items without flying. So are we prepared to say to people 'yup in the past you could do that, but now you aren't allowed'. That seems to be challenging.
But there are plenty of things that can be achieved just as easily without buying so much carbon. I may reasonably want my house to be warm - sure that can be achieved by turning up my boiler - but it can also be achieved by providing different (and greener) means of achieving the same ends, which would include simply better insulation. Likewise it is a legitimate and reasonable expectation that my lights turn on when I flick the switch - but those lights may be energy efficient and the electricity generated by low carbon renewable means, including installing solar panels.
So to me we should be focussing on the areas where we can legitimately expect to achieve the same outcome in a more sustainable way. And we may then be able to cope with some activities that can't be achieved in the greenest manner - such as seeing Machu Pichu (a bucket list of mine) when you live north of London. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't work really hard to make aviation greener, but I do feel we need to differentiate between activities that people may legitimately want to pursue that can easily be achieved in a much more sustainable way and those that cannot easily.
And if we are talking about travel and flying - the focus really should be on business travel. Travel for many (if not most) business meetings can easily be replaced by on-line meetings.
-
We could start with banning private jets:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jan/26/flying-shame-the-scandalous-rise-of-private-jets
What say you Rishi?
-
Good points Prof D...!
-
Today marks International Plastic Overshoot Day https://tinyurl.com/mufu52n8
-
Today marks International Plastic Overshoot Day https://tinyurl.com/mufu52n8
I believe plastic was created to replace wood and metals. A wonderful and versatile material in fact.... but how it has been misused.
-
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-66314338
**********
False claims suggesting that the BBC has been misreporting temperatures in southern Europe have been spreading on social media.
A clip of Neil Oliver, a GB News presenter, accusing the BBC "and others" of "driving fear" by using "supposedly terrifying temperatures", has been viewed more than two million times.
For the past few weeks, an intense heatwave has been sweeping through parts of southern Europe and north Africa, with extensive wildfires breaking out in Greece, Italy and Algeria - leading to more than 40 deaths.
Speaking about the fires on Rhodes on GB News on Monday, Mr Oliver accused the BBC, and other broadcasters, of trying to "make people terrified of the weather".
***********
-
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-66314338
**********
False claims suggesting that the BBC has been misreporting temperatures in southern Europe have been spreading on social media.
A clip of Neil Oliver, a GB News presenter, accusing the BBC "and others" of "driving fear" by using "supposedly terrifying temperatures", has been viewed more than two million times.
For the past few weeks, an intense heatwave has been sweeping through parts of southern Europe and north Africa, with extensive wildfires breaking out in Greece, Italy and Algeria - leading to more than 40 deaths.
Speaking about the fires on Rhodes on GB News on Monday, Mr Oliver accused the BBC, and other broadcasters, of trying to "make people terrified of the weather".
***********
That's appalling - but it seems to be standard these day that people think they are entitled to their own facts!
-
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/07/30/world/antarctic-sea-ice-winter-record-low-climate-intl/index.html
***********
Every year, Antarctic sea ice shrinks to its lowest levels towards the end of February, during the continent’s summer. The sea ice then builds back up over the winter.
But this year scientists have observed something different.
The sea ice has not returned to anywhere near expected levels. In fact it is at the lowest levels for this time of year since records began 45 years ago. The ice is around 1.6 million square kilometers (0.6 million square miles) below the previous winter record low set in 2022, according to data from the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC).
In mid-July, Antarctica’s sea ice was 2.6 million square kilometers (1 million square miles) below the 1981 to 2010 average. That is an area nearly as large as Argentina or the combined areas of Texas, California, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, and Colorado
“The game has changed,” he told CNN. “There’s no sense talking about the odds of it happening the way the system used to be, it’s clearly telling us that the system has changed.”
Scientists are now scrambling to figure out why.
Scambos said that this winter’s record low level of sea ice is a very alarming signal.
“In 2016, [Antarctic sea ice] took the first big down-turn. Since 2016, it’s remained low, and now the bottom has fallen out. Something major in a huge part of the planet is suddenly behaving differently from what we saw for the past 45 years.”
************
Every day something more....
-
Stewart Lee being depressingly funny:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jul/30/europe-burns-while-the-tories-net-zero-plans-are-set-to-go-up-in-smoke
-
Did I hear you say Ostriches:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jul/31/greece-wildfires-climate-crisis-developed-world
(And yes I know that Ostriches don't actually bury their head in the sand - but we certainly do)
-
And of course lots more drilling licences to be granted. Tbh, I think the govt are creating an electorally powerful narrative here around energy security, given the energy price rises we had. It also puts the Labour Party in a difficult position, given Starmer's reaction to Uxbridge.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-66354478
-
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-66314338
**********
False claims suggesting that the BBC has been misreporting temperatures in southern Europe have been spreading on social media.
A clip of Neil Oliver, a GB News presenter, accusing the BBC "and others" of "driving fear" by using "supposedly terrifying temperatures", has been viewed more than two million times.
For the past few weeks, an intense heatwave has been sweeping through parts of southern Europe and north Africa, with extensive wildfires breaking out in Greece, Italy and Algeria - leading to more than 40 deaths.
Speaking about the fires on Rhodes on GB News on Monday, Mr Oliver accused the BBC, and other broadcasters, of trying to "make people terrified of the weather".
***********
I'm not sure what reputational impact appearing on GB news has. I should imagine there are many people who liked GB news presenters for their previous talents.
-
And of course lots more drilling licences to be granted. Tbh, I think the govt are creating an electorally powerful narrative here around energy security, given the energy price rises we had. It also puts the Labour Party in a difficult position, given Starmer's reaction to Uxbridge.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-66354478
People won't enjoy the benefits of drilling licences though. The oil companies will.
-
People won't enjoy the benefits of drilling licences though. The oil companies will.
Yes but as NS has said if it is framed in the context of energy security, there are more than enough people who will be swayed by that, regardless of whether they feel any benefit or not.
-
Yes but as NS has said if it is framed in the context of energy security, there are more than enough people who will be swayed by that, regardless of whether they feel any benefit or not.
what makes this claim then, more believable now than two or three months ago?
I would have thought the received wisdom was that we have had the best years of not just North sea oil but oil in general. How can Sunak possibly sell a new oil bonanza?
If though we mean that this is the long awaited 'plausible' excuse people need to vote Tory with something approaching a clear conscience, who am I to disagree?
-
what makes this claim then, more believable now than two or three months ago?
I would have thought the received wisdom was that we have had the best years of not just North sea oil but oil in general. How can Sunak possibly sell a new oil bonanza?
If though we mean that this is the long awaited 'plausible' excuse people need to vote Tory with something approaching a clear conscience, who am I to disagree?
In answer to your first question, Uxbridge, and Starmer's reaction.
-
In answer to your first question, Uxbridge, and Starmer's reaction.
Uxbridge was a 'squeak', arguably down to a failure of tactical voting, turdpolished by the tories into a great and sea changing victory. I agree though that Starmer has to come to a point where he must realise he's convinced all the tories he's ever going to.
-
Uxbridge was a 'squeak', arguably down to a failure of tactical voting, turdpolished by the tories into a great and sea changing victory. I agree though that Starmer has to come to a point where he must realise he's convinced all the tories he's ever going to.
It's not a sea changing victory but it illustrates that people will vote against grand green plans if they feel affected. Indeed, it plays exactly into your own take tgat the electorate are selfish and will seek reasons to vote Tory.
Starmer's reaction means he leads a divided party, and is following the Tory lead.
-
It's not a sea changing victory but it illustrates that people will vote against grand green plans if they feel affected. Indeed, it plays exactly into your own take tgat the electorate are selfish and will seek reasons to vote Tory.
Starmer's reaction means he leads a divided party, and is following the Tory lead.
Quite so.
The Tories will home in on this along with a few other key issues, notably, women's rights, where Labour have made a right hash of their approach to transgendered issues as they affect women, to cut Labours lead.
I know Labour are rowing back on the trans issue now, but there is enough nonsense that they have put out that the Tories will be able to make very considerable amounts of hay.
Added: I've just read this and it is quite a digression I've managed. Note to self, please try to stay on topic.
-
Quite so.
The Tories will home in on this along with a few other key issues, notably, women's rights, where Labour have made a right hash of their approach to transgendered issues as they affect women, to cut Labours lead.
I know Labour are rowing back on the trans issue now, but there is enough nonsense that they have put out that the Tories will be able to make very considerable amounts of hay.
Added: I've just read this and it is quite a digression I've managed. Note to self, please try to stay on topic.
To connect it up, the carbon capture stuff looks great, we're doing something, and it creates jobs - although almost certainly nowhere near the numbers that are talked about. And yet, it's not reducing the use of oil and gas, and is probably a couple of decades too late to be of use.
As Vlad raised though, the oil was supposedly running out at the time of the Indyref - there was no chance of Scotland having energy security in 2050 then. But as ever politics is a grubby business.
-
.... and what does AI have to say about mankind's plight ......
https://tinyurl.com/mrdajx9j
-
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/08/01/uk/britain-rishi-sunak-climate-policies-analysis-gbr-intl/index.html
************
Less than two years ago, Britain was championing itself as a global leader in the fight against the climate crisis.
At the pivotal COP26 climate conference in Glasgow, then-Prime Minister Boris Johnson rallied world leaders to find agreement on a historic resolution acknowledging the role of fossil fuels in the climate crisis, and the late Queen Elizabeth II said in a landmark speech that “time for words has now moved to the time for action.”
Things feel very different now. As Rishi Sunak’s beleaguered government limps towards an election it is widely expected to lose, determination has seemingly been swapped for division.
And after a decade of cross-party consensus on tackling the climate crisis, experts fear that Sunak has identified green policies as a new wedge issue that could help reverse his party’s sagging fortunes.
Sunak said Monday he wants to “max out” oil and gas developments in Britain’s North Sea, announcing an expansion in drilling for the fossil fuels that environmental groups have condemned.
The move followed a proclamation from Sunak to Britain’s drivers, in the Telegraph newspaper, that he was “on their side,” as he ordered a review of “anti-motorist” low-traffic neighborhoods created to improve urban air quality.
Few expect the new push to be an election-winner. But Murphy, like many climate experts, fears there are wider ramifications for Britain’s global standing.
“For all the faults of the Boris Johnson government, what you can say is there appeared to be a genuine commitment to net zero and to the climate agenda,” he said.
“Since then we’ve gone backwards. We’ve stalled in many policy areas,” Murphy added. “I don’t think many people would actually now consider the UK to be a global leader (on the climate).”
*************
-
An argument against 'doom saying'
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jul/26/we-cant-afford-to-be-climate-doomers
And a reply, which is to me more persuasive. We seem to be solving the last problem but one continually.
https://medium.com/@renaeech/responding-to-rebecca-solnits-article-in-the-guardian-on-doomers-a12b0f8106e9
-
The oceans cannae take it!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-66387537
-
And oceans continue to boil
https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2023/08/two-tipping-points.html
-
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/09/13/world/planetary-boundaries-humanity-climate/index.html
*************
Human actions have pushed the world into the danger zone on several key indicators of planetary health, threatening to trigger dramatic changes in conditions on Earth, according to a new analysis from 29 scientists in eight countries.
The scientists analyzed nine interlinked “planetary boundaries,” which they define as thresholds the world needs to stay within to ensure a stable, livable planet. These include climate change, biodiversity, freshwater and land use, and the impact of synthetic chemicals and aerosols.
Human activities have breached safe levels for six of these boundaries and are pushing the world outside a “safe operating space” for humanity, according to the report, published on Wednesday in the journal Science Advances.
Of the three boundaries that scientists found are still within a safe space, two of them – ocean acidification and the amount of aerosols in the atmosphere – are moving in the wrong direction.
This report is the third update on the planetary boundaries framework. The previous was published in 2015.
“What scares me is that transgression is increasing for all of the boundaries that were found to be transgressed in 2015,” said Richardson, who added, “this isn’t getting better.”
**************
-
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-66724246
*********
The sea-ice surrounding Antarctica is well below any previous recorded winter level, satellite data shows, a worrying new benchmark for a region that once seemed resistant to global warming.
"It's so far outside anything we've seen, it's almost mind-blowing," says Walter Meier, who monitors sea-ice with the National Snow and Ice Data Center.
An unstable Antarctica could have far-reaching consequences, polar experts warn.
Antarctica's huge ice expanse regulates the planet's temperature, as the white surface reflects the Sun's energy back into the atmosphere and also cools the water beneath and near it.
Without its ice cooling the planet, Antarctica could transform from Earth's refrigerator to a radiator, experts say.
The ice that floats on the Antarctic Ocean's surface now measures less than 17 million sq km - that is 1.5 million sq km of sea-ice less than the September average, and well below previous winter record lows.
That's an area of missing ice about five times the size of the British Isles.
**********
-
I am utterly and completely shocked ;)
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-66857551
-
The Uxbridge Effect continues
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66871457
-
It looks as though Risky has made a serious mis-step, even on the cynical, populist grounds which probably motivated his U-turn: it seems that the British public are broadly in favour of net-zero policies.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/sep/21/al-gore-rishi-sunak-climate-crisis
-
It looks as though Risky has made a serious mis-step, even on the cynical, populist grounds which probably motivated his U-turn: it seems that the British public are broadly in favour of net-zero policies.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/sep/21/al-gore-rishi-sunak-climate-crisis
You have to remember that for the Tories to win an election they don't need a majority of votes, and that being 'broadly in favour of net zero' doesn't mean being in favour of specific policies.
-
In one interview this morning, Kemi Badenoch I think, said that delaying the ban on the sale of new petrol cars would help "hard-pressed families". Why the interviewer didn't point out that hard-pressed families can't afford new cars of any sort is beyond me.
-
The interesting thing now is how will Labour position itself on this. Starmer's reaction to Uxbridge would hint at the Tories being echoed.
-
The front pages. Usual shite from the right wing rags, except for the Times, which is more nuanced.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/sep/21/sunak-green-gamble-pm-net-zero-u-turn-divides-uk-front-pages
-
In one interview this morning, Kemi Badenoch I think, said that delaying the ban on the sale of new petrol cars would help "hard-pressed families". Why the interviewer didn't point out that hard-pressed families can't afford new cars of any sort is beyond me.
The ban on new petrol cars was just performative. It was always going to be postponed.
-
That's appalling - but it seems to be standard these day that people think they are entitled to their own facts!
I saw one Tory dinosaur being interviewed by Chris Packham last night, who one might have expected this to come out with this sort of thing (I believe it was Peter Lilley, whom I thought and hoped had died). But one might have expected better things of Neil Oliver, who I believe is a trained archaeologist, and whom one might expect to be a little more concerned with facts. Perhaps he picked up some strange brain infection on his travels, given the bizarre nature of his comments over the last few years.
-
I saw one Tory dinosaur being interviewed by Chris Packham last night, who one might have expected this to come out with this sort of thing (I believe it was Peter Lilley, whom I thought and hoped had died).
I watched it tonight it was Lord Lilley. He had no idea of how to use or read statistics and thought every 'event' was completely separate from every other event.
-
.
-
6 months is a long time in politics
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66900999
-
A little bit of good news
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/sep/26/staggering-green-growth-gives-hope-for-15c-says-global-energy-head
-
Can't think of a by election that's been as significant in influencing govt policies as Uxbridge
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-66927242
-
A Rosebank by any other name...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66933832
-
And govt doing really well with UK nature
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-66923930
-
Those bad 20mph limits, free the motorist! I feel the need, the need for 30mph speed!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66957733
-
The fall of the Berlin Wall, 9/11, 7/7. Events seared on the brain where I can remember exactly where I was and what I was doing. And now to add to that the great hope inspired by Rishi Sunak that at last the great and terrible scourge that is the war on the motorist is ending. The dreadful suffering of 20 mph limits, and low traffic zones, things almost too darkly frightening to think about, and the hero Sunak with his combustion engine of glorious righteousness sets us free!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66965714
-
;D ;D
-
¡A las barricadas!
I think we should start making bets on what laughably beyond parody cunning stunt Just Stop Oil will do next.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-67013671
-
¡A las barricadas!
I think we should start making bets on what laughably beyond parody cunning stunt Just Stop Oil will do next.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-67013671
FFS.
Don't they realise they are just isolating themselves from people who would be sympathetic to their cause?
Why on earth didn't they try to disrupt the Tory conference?
That would make some sort of coherent sense given the appalling way the Conservative government is approaching environmental issues.
-
FFS.
Don't they realise they are just isolating themselves from people who would be sympathetic to their cause?
Why on earth didn't they try to disrupt the Tory conference?
That would make some sort of coherent sense given the appalling way the Conservative government is approaching environmental issues.
Were I to be an agent of the 'deep state' given a mission to infiltrate and undermine JSO, this is the sort of stuff I would suggest they do. Though I would have had everyone wearing Susan Boyle masks.
-
More records
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-67017021
-
I watched it tonight it was Lord Lilley. He had no idea of how to use or read statistics and thought every 'event' was completely separate from every other event.
World could be heading for hottest October ever - after hottest July, August and September2023 is on track to be the hottest year on record as an emerging El Niño adds to the impact of climate change[/font][/color][/size]
Lord Lilley won't worry about El Nino happening again. Just another coincidence.
Happening again and again.
And more and more often.
But still just a coincidence.
-
Save the planet, destroy the Nipple! Or maybe not...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-67028209
-
Perhaps this will be the crucial.kick up the arse
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-67078674
-
It's all going very well, or rather feel the quality nevermind the width.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topstories/one-huge-contradiction-is-undoing-our-best-climate-efforts/ar-AA1jIWPg
-
'Pledge, you say, Sir Keir?'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67528894
-
So what happens now, another suitcase and another COP
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-67557533
-
Why do I have Doctor Evil saying 400 million dollars in my head?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-67581277
-
COP a load of this!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-67513901
-
Here come the mozzies!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-67591422
-
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/dec/03/back-into-caves-cop28-president-dismisses-phase-out-of-fossil-fuels
Well, that is a surprise ::)
-
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/dec/03/back-into-caves-cop28-president-dismisses-phase-out-of-fossil-fuels
Well, that is a surprise ::)
Apparently it's all ok because...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-67612929
-
For some reason the interview below popped up.on my Youtube suggestions. I'm now just to turn the heating up, switch on all the lights, and order the least fuel efficient car I can find.
https://youtu.be/bumKlEoGhvk?si=uz6w1ocOVy20Rohg
-
.
-
Deal or no deal, does it really matter?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-67679732
-
The drought in Catalonia
https://www.lemonde.fr/en/environment/article/2023/12/15/catalonia-prepares-for-major-water-restrictions-amidst-historic-drought_6348566_114.html
-
Some unimpressed takes on COP28
https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20231214-weak-tea-climate-scientists-push-back-against-cop28-cheer
-
The costs of bad wind planning
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67494082
-
Phew! What a scorcher!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-67861954
-
Amazingly having a target without a plan is almost like not having a target.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-68133751
-
And more Scottish govt gaps in planning. It would be good to have the Greens in govt to make sure this didn't happen....
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-68133750
-
Case against Greta Thunberg thrown out
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-68180317
-
Turned out nice again...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68110310
-
https://www.ndtv.com/science/gulf-stream-could-collapse-as-early-as-2025-mini-ice-age-on-the-way-study-5061782#pfrom=home-ndtv_trending
************
Gulf Stream Could Collapse As Early As 2025, Mini Ice Age On The Way: Study
the Gulf Stream could collapse due to melting glaciers as soon as 2025, shutting down of vital ocean current.
The Gulf Stream, a powerful ocean current originating in the Gulf of Mexico, plays a pivotal role in regulating the climate of the North Atlantic region. Its warm waters act as a natural conveyor belt, transporting heat from the Equator towards the poles and influencing weather patterns along its path.
Without this additional heat, the average temperature could drop by several degrees in North America, parts of Asia and Europe - as much as 10 degrees Celsius in a few decades. This will have a "severe and cascading consequences around the world".
************
So....is it now going to reduce global warming or is it not?!
-
....
So....is it now going to reduce global warming or is it not?!
It's better to think of the phenomenon overall as 'climate change' as in the original title.you choose since localised changes like this not result in increased temperatures.
I don't have access to the report but from the article it reads as if the effect is taken in isolation so doesn't appear as if your question was one considered.
-
https://www.ndtv.com/science/gulf-stream-could-collapse-as-early-as-2025-mini-ice-age-on-the-way-study-5061782#pfrom=home-ndtv_trending
************
Gulf Stream Could Collapse As Early As 2025, Mini Ice Age On The Way: Study
the Gulf Stream could collapse due to melting glaciers as soon as 2025, shutting down of vital ocean current.
The Gulf Stream, a powerful ocean current originating in the Gulf of Mexico, plays a pivotal role in regulating the climate of the North Atlantic region. Its warm waters act as a natural conveyor belt, transporting heat from the Equator towards the poles and influencing weather patterns along its path.
Without this additional heat, the average temperature could drop by several degrees in North America, parts of Asia and Europe - as much as 10 degrees Celsius in a few decades. This will have a "severe and cascading consequences around the world".
************
So....is it now going to reduce global warming or is it not?!
Neither, it's one of the results of global warming - the whole 'climate change' thing. If the Gulf Stream fails the UK and Western European climate will be massively altered. The Gulf Stream is the major climate factor that results in the UK, which is wholly north of lower 48 states of the US, not having the sort of cold weather during winter that places like New York, Minnesota and southern Canada get. Dutch, Belgian, and UK ports may find themselves icebound in the winter, our current crop timings and even selections may become non-viable. It's difficult to precisely estimate how significant it will be, in part because it's difficult to precisely gauge where the heat energy that's currently conducted by the Gulf Stream will go instead.
O.
-
I understand the point about different places experiencing different climatic changes. No problem.
But they were talking of an increase in average global temperatures beyond 1.5 C....and now they are talking of a mini ice age.
-
I understand the point about different places experiencing different climatic changes. No problem.
But they were talking of an increase in average global temperatures beyond 1.5 C....and now they are talking of a mini ice age.
Localised. You are also looking at scientists as a monolith which is not the case.
-
I understand the point about different places experiencing different climatic changes. No problem.
But they were talking of an increase in average global temperatures beyond 1.5 C....and now they are talking of a mini ice age.
A local mini ice age. Admittedly western Europe and Eastern USA is a pretty big area to call 'local' :(. But the global averages are going to continue to rise while we here in the UK would freeze :(
-
Bloody hell, zombie fires now!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68228943
-
Phew, what a scorcher!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68428348
-
Could do with a bit of climate change in West Herts. I'm fed up with chilly, dull, intermittently wet weather, and there's no end in sight.
-
The crazy world of geoengineering
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68206309
-
Tentative good news in the UK:
https://www.businessgreen.com/blog-post/4191204/halfway-net-zero-heaven
-
Warm enough for you?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68665166
-
Oh ffs!
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/sunny-hostin-is-roasted-by-the-view-co-hosts-after-claiming-that-the-solar-eclipse-and-earthquake-are-linked-to-climate-change/ar-BB1lioya
-
The coral canna take it
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68814016
-
Oh ffs!
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/sunny-hostin-is-roasted-by-the-view-co-hosts-after-claiming-that-the-solar-eclipse-and-earthquake-are-linked-to-climate-change/ar-BB1lioya
That's all we need - some Yank sleb climate-change-affirming idiot talking bollocks to give the climate-change-denying idiots an opportunity to look relatively sane.
-
The idea that the Dubai floods might be caused by cloud seeding is interesting
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68839043
-
"Scotland to ditch key climate change target". Where is my completely and utterly shocked face?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-68841141
-
A view, not a cheery one, of how climate change might affect incomes
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/apr/17/climate-crisis-average-world-incomes-to-drop-by-nearly-a-fifth-by-2050
-
The idea that the Dubai floods might be caused by cloud seeding is interesting
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68839043
Report in link has since been updated to say no.
-
Good and bad news on conservation
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68897433
-
'Government defeated in High Court over climate plans'.
I do wonder how many advisors to Sunak are suggesting that a manifesto that effectively throws their climate commitments away would be an easier sell than this muddle
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-68947242
-
Woo hoo, another record breaking year
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68921215
-
And following on from that, this:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/may/08/world-scientists-climate-failure-survey-global-temperature
This quote represents the general tone of the article:
“The world’s response to date is reprehensible – we live in an age of fools.”
-
And following on from that, this:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/may/08/world-scientists-climate-failure-survey-global-temperature
This quote represents the general tone of the article:
"Lisa Schipper, at University of Bonn in Germany, said: “My only source of hope is the fact that, as an educator, I can see the next generation being so smart and understanding the politics.”"
Hmm......
-
Why climate scientists are worried.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2024/may/08/hopeless-and-broken-why-the-worlds-top-climate-scientists-are-in-despair
-
'CO2 increasing 10 times faster than any point in last 50,000 years'
https://news.stv.tv/east-central/co2-increasing-10-times-faster-than-any-point-in-last-50000-years-scottish-and-us-research-shows
-
'Key oil project must count full climate impact - court' - hugely important decision.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cxwwzmn12g9o
-
World's hottest day, twice in a week
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crg7pen1xj7o
-
And warming up in Antarctica:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/aug/01/antarctic-temperatures-rise-10c-above-average-in-near-record-heatwave
-
It's all going very well
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2kkdpnyp4o
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cdrjjl3mmy8t
-
Fecking Boris
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckgmrnwgm7zo
-
Fecking Boris
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckgmrnwgm7zo
For a moment I was puzzled - I blame Johnson for a lot of things but this seemed over the top even to me.
Then I remembered Storm Boris. Duh.
-
Death threats to meteorologists
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/oct/11/meteorologists-death-threats-hurricane-conspiracies-misinformation
-
So you can tell how much god loves your country on how much oil and gas it gave you.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpqd1rzw9r4o
-
We've done the 1.5C - yay us!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd7575x8yq5o
-
And then along come these clowns, masters of denial, purveyors of untruths:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/jan/15/farage-and-truss-attend-uk-launch-of-us-climate-denial-group-heartland
I know that this will, linguistically speaking, upset some posters, but we are so fucked.
-
And then along come these clowns, masters of denial, purveyors of untruths:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/jan/15/farage-and-truss-attend-uk-launch-of-us-climate-denial-group-heartland
I know that this will, linguistically speaking, upset some posters, but we are so fucked.
when will Truss join Reform?
-
Yesterday I bought a car that has a 0.8L engine, and costs £35 a year to tax. It has a fresh MOT so I'm hoping it won't need too much work doing on it. The tax on the car I had previously was £200, which was a big factor in choosing this one.
-
And then along come these clowns, masters of denial, purveyors of untruths:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/jan/15/farage-and-truss-attend-uk-launch-of-us-climate-denial-group-heartland
I know that this will, linguistically speaking, upset some posters, but we are so fucked.
just as I was thinking that Fartage might have a hear tafterall, when he opined that Shamima Begum should be allowed back into the UK, he reverts to type.
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwyjk92w9k1o
-
Dear Fellow posters,
Yes! this is the thread, God can take of himself ( himself, its just pure laziness, fuck off ) in a world gone crazy this thread is the most important one, all the madness of world comes winging its way back to what this thread is all about.
On the good old BBC I do think this is the most important section
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/cmj34zmwm1zt
When I speak to climate change deniers they tell me, don't worry be happy🎶🎵 just good old natures way, it will sort itself out, not our problemo.
Myself I get stuck on the phrase "Save the Planet" Doctor I have this terrible rash, oh don't worry its what we in the profession call mankindius horriblius, its a self destroying rash, you are a old timer you have seen worse.
Save the Planet, it lacks something, anyone on this forum work in the advertisement industry, something that really hits home.
Anyway all you Theist, Atheist numpties can go fly a kite, this is the happening thread.
Gonnagle.
-
Dear Fellow Posters,
https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/64987543
Gonnagle.
-
the 2025 version :
https://www.globalrecyclingday.com/home/ (https://www.globalrecyclingday.com/home/)
-
Dear Torridon,
Cheers mate ;)
Countdown to Global Recycling Day 2025
Every year, the Earth yields billions of tons of natural resources and at some point, in the not too distant future, it will run out.
That’s why we must think again about what we throw away – seeing not waste, but opportunity.
The last decade has been the hottest on record, and we are now facing a climate emergency of unparalleled proportions. If we don’t make significant and rapid changes, we will see continued rising global temperatures, the melting of icecaps, continents on fire and rapid deforestation.
This directly affects humanity with increased poverty, immigration from displaced communities, job losses, waste mountains and natural habitats disappearing. We have the power to make lasting changes to combat this, and with recycling being recognized in the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals 2030, we are already seeing many individuals, governments and organisations taking direct action to support the global green agenda.
Recycling is a key part of the circular economy, helping to protect our natural resources. Each year the ‘Seventh Resource’ (recyclables) saves over 700 million tonnes in CO2 emissions and this is projected to increase to 1 billion tons by 2030. There is no doubt recycling is on the front line in the war to save the future of our planet and humanity.
The Global Recycling Foundation is pleased to announce the theme of Global Recycling Day 2024 as #RecyclingHeroes. This will recognise the people, places and activities that showcase what an important role recycling plays in contributing to an environmentally stable planet and a greener future which will benefit all.
Global Recycling Day was created in 2018 to help recognise, and celebrate, the importance recycling plays in preserving our precious primary resources and securing the future of our planet. It is a day for the world to come together and put the planet first.
The mission of Global Recycling Day, as set out by the Global Recycling Foundation, is twofold:
1. To tell world leaders that recycling is simply too important not to be a global issue, and that a common, joined up approach to recycling is urgently needed.
2. To ask people across the planet to think resource, not waste, when it comes to the goods around us – until this happens, we simply won’t award recycled goods the true value and repurpose they deserve.
Gonnagle.
-
..... and not to forget Earth Overshoot Day .....
https://overshoot.footprintnetwork.org/
-
Dear Thread,
A step in the right direction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c75792nvwpzo
But as always >:(
About 480 jobs could be created with the manufacture of e-methanol for jet fuel and e-ammonia for shipping - but that would require £6.6bn of private investment and would not be operational until around 2035, the report said.
You want a tank, gun, air to air fuck off missile, no problemo.
Gonnagle.