http://www.avaaz.org/en/save_eu_climate_legacy_d/?fzKLubb&pv=42
Please take time to read and make up your own mind.
Please take time to read and make up your own mind.
Last edited:
Climate Change I hope this is not to political but it is so important
- Thread starter nodd
- Start date
- Status
'Not too political' perhaps?
Search for avaaz.org and you'll find lots of complaints from people who have signed and then get hit with a load of spam mail.
Search for avaaz.org and you'll find lots of complaints from people who have signed and then get hit with a load of spam mail.
Clicked the link, couldn't find anything to read as such, very difficult to make any sort of decision on what was there to read... Not even sure of what the picture was meant to be depicting? having worked on a few industrial sites there was nothing there that screamed "pollution" at me, a few chimneys and some cooling towers don't necessarily cause "pollution" as such.
There are those that believe strongly in climate change and also those that do not believe in it, personally I am a little confused with the climate change situation. Not having any scientific training or knowledge myself I only know what I see and what I am told and what I read so who do you believe, those for or those against both argue their case equally strongly. It is undeniable there have been changes over the years such as seasonal and weather patterns polar cap shrinkage etc etc, but hasn’t the earth been changing anyway since the very first day it was formed, evolution and conservation are two very different things, one means constant change the other means keeping it as it is, for the first time in the earths history humans are attempting to ‘conserve’ it, in other words to stop change and halt evolution, was it not evolution that killed off the dinosaurs, has not the land surface changed enormously through evolution and was it not the earth warming up that thawed out the ice-age in the first place, if dinosaurs were alive today we would be trying conservation on them in an attempt to stop extinction yet they did not die out through human activity but natural evolution, the polar caps are shrinking but have they not always been constantly shrinking since the ice-age, our shoreline is changing but has it not always been constantly changing with evolution as it was once joined to France, there are hundreds of similar questions. Every time a freak weather storm breaks we hear ‘the worst hot/cold/wind/floods etc etc’ for ‘however’ many years, so doesn’t that really mean there were actually worse storms before the year quoted. It is undeniable human activity has had a great effect on the earth but equally undeniable that the earth has always been changing through evolution. The last two or three hundred years is just a tiny blip in history. I can’t make up my mind which side of the fence I sit on and wether I believe in climate change or not, I feel however that humans will try to maintain the earth that we know today through conservation but will fail to halt evolution, as to wether that evolution is natural or man-made is the big question. Sadly I am very confused about it all but imagine the earth will be around a lot longer than humans, in what state who knows though, it needs us less than we need it and will do very nicely without us.
Great post...^^^
Too true, out of 6 billion years it is probably not even a blink of the eye in comparison...
Too true, out of 6 billion years it is probably not even a blink of the eye in comparison...
@Joonsy; that's actually a resonable summation of James Lovelock's Gaia Theory, recommended reading for the confused and bewildered......Make it quick though, there's not long left!
Not sure about 'confused and bewildered' that could be read as a tad patronising
I've no doubt whatsoever that we are dumping massive amounts of poo on mother Gaia but as to its being enough to cause climate change? For me the jury is still out.
Good post Joonsy, you're not the only one confused by climate change.
Here is an interesting article I came across recently.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-25743806
It doesn't have any answers but it asks some good questions
Here is an interesting article I came across recently.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-25743806
It doesn't have any answers but it asks some good questions
Last edited:
Not exactly new news this! And remember that the BBC is massively one-sided on climate issues. If its cold, its due to CO2 rises. If its warm, its due to CO2 rises etc etc etc. Notice how thy made such a big play about Cameron's "the floods could be due to global warming"?
I don't know who's right. I do however understand flim-flam, and major flaws in logic. I do understand when the "techie" drivers behind the IPCC say things like "our models predict temperature rises, but these aren't occurring - lets change our data and refuse to publish our base data". (google Climategate for lots of detail on this!). I worry when the official line is that the Sun has no significant bearing on our climate and changes to it (how incredibly illogical is this?) or makes any comment on the geomagnetic changes occurring (10% less than 150 years ago). I worry when all the focus is on increased temperatures, yet no one seems to be paying any attention to solar activity, which seems to be indicating a return to another Maunder minimum (or worse), which would clearly be more catastrophic on the planet in terms of food production etc than a few degree rise in temp.
As in any fraud investigation, Rule No 1 is to "follow the money". And as any research scientist knows, you follow the grants. And guess who is getting virtually all of these?
some interesting facts can be found here..http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2hOhq0vHfMI
I think that regardless of people's opinions on whether climate change is true or not, taking steps to combat climate change also takes steps to combat pollution, biodiversity, and our dependence on fossil fuels.
I think this picture sums up my view of the subject quite well!
I think this picture sums up my view of the subject quite well!
New Scientists Guide for the perplexed, worth reading because amongst other things its got a section about the usual arguments against it that get trollied out and how they are de-bunked.
Worth reading because it might stop one or two people sounding silly.
Worth reading because it might stop one or two people sounding silly.
New Scientists Guide for the perplexed, worth reading because amongst other things its got a section about the usual arguments against it that get trollied out and how they are de-bunked.
Worth reading because it might stop one or two people sounding silly.
Interesting articles. Thanks for that.
If Gaia had any credence then you would think She would have done something when that dreadfully reactive oxygen started being generated or all that corrosive water, as for the green mould of plant life, shrug that off immediately cleanse back to decent rock.
Because Gaia enthusiasts are always going on about how we misuse the Earth and at sometime there will be a reckoning. Total nonsense and I was trying to illustrate the fact that if Gaia was a fact then a nice clean planet might be preferred by She.
- Status
Similar threads
