Is the flooding related to global warming?

[superstarheartbreaker]

thoughts please?

[doleritedinosaur]

As a geologist & studied climate change not so long ago, yes but there are also other factors.

London & the south east is tectonically subsiding & therefore going underwater, but quite slowly.

The ice melting is rising sea levels but so is the pollutants in the atmosphere effecting weather patterns etc.

Also coastlines erode & rivers change courses & flood, Britain has built on flood plains which do flood, not every year, not every decade but do flood.

[Paperkins]

On a local level, we have flooding in some roads near here as in the last two years nearly every front garden has been turned into a driveway, so the water just runs off into drains that were put there when the gardens soaked up most of the rain. And then there's talk of fatburgs and other drainage probs

[Fomalhaut]

Yes it is.

Yes there's always been extreme weather. And you can't tie an indicvidual weather event to global warming.

But It's the pattern of weather events that's changing. the change as a whole is linked to global warming.

There is no scientific divide or debate on global warming. Just like every single medical and scientific body of repute supports vaccination. What you read on the fringes of the interweb isn't science.

[Elendon]

Hi, thanks for the link. I suggest you start a fresh thread with the link in it.

I've completed the survey. I for one cannot give up my car, nor can I afford higher taxes on fuel. However, I do would have a small electric car, just not at Telsa prices!

China is hoping to reduce the consumption of meat by half by 2050, and is ploughing ahead with renewables. It's had to do this because of climate change.

[HippyDippyRidingPretty]

Douche

Just for the opening sentence and digging a zombie thread to use it. Didn't read any further, I need to get back to breeding.

[apibeeman]

Seeing as mumsnet is mostly about having babies and breeding, maybe you should all open your eyes a bit and take a serious look at global warming. First check out Easter Island and what happened there, as I think we are going the same way, there is plenty of info on the internet.
The main thing about global warming besides the temperature rise, is the sea rising. Within most of our lives it will be 10 feet, probably more. There is plenty of info about this on the internet. That means there will be about 100,000,000 people displaced. Where do you think those people will go, or do?
Then there is the sad fact that businesses and governments are trying to make money out of the bad situation, which is just making things worse, take carbon trading for an example.
Then we have the real polluters. massive ships using about 380 tons of crude oil to propel them through the water/day. the fumes and soot are pumped into the sea so you do not see the smoke. These ships are increasing 10%/year.
Then we have military, I believe US military produces 50% of the worlds pollution.
How about rockets, they are far from pollution free.
O.K. now consider this:- the authorities are going be picking on us, our heating and consumption. Our carbon footprint that they are going to be taxing us on.
Why are they not taxing the real polluters?
This November 30 2015, the UN are going to be holding a conference in Paris to tie governments to restriction co2 emissions. It will probably be as big a fiasco as the Kyoto agreement in 2006.
Wake up people, if you want a world for your children and grandchildren to live in you had better unite and do something. Personally I think we are nearly too late.

[MoreBeta]

I'm a one nation Tory who wishes we still had a Tory party. Socially liberal and economically conservative. I grew up in a rural area, was a farmer for a while and believe in environmental protection.

Does that make me right wing?

[OhYouBadBadKitten]

Blimey MoreBeta, you must be very right wing!

[HesterShaw]

And obviously they are a really viable option.

[MoreBeta]

I think you will find we have a centre left Govt at the moment and do remember the LibDems are rather keen supporters of climate change policies and green issues. David Cameron is not anti climate change policy. He has recently said that ’most people accept that, with climate change, [flooding events] are likely to be more frequent’.

He has however, come out against green taxes because of the political battle with Labour over energy prices. Its about time but fundamentally he does believe climate change is happening.

Only UKIP are really against climate change policies.

[BoulevardOfBrokenSleep]

MoreBeta "Do you honestly believe a Govt that wants renewable investment to take place and has said so in its manifesto would publish or accept countervailing evidence?"

I certainly believe this government would, yes. They haven't got any ideological commitment to touchy-feely green shit, and would love a nice fuel-bill-slashing budget.
The only thing that would make Cameron happier than climate-change-disproving evidence would be a definitive study showing the EU regularly bites the heads off fluffy kittens, while using the union flag as toilet paper.

[inde]

amicissimma

You do realise that David Rose, James Delingpole, Christopher Booker etc. have no scientific training and their articles in the Mail and the Telegraph are almost totally fact free?

[inde]

Returning to the OP I think if anyone mentions climate change in the Somerset levels there will be a riot.

Why would there be a riot? If this were a one in a hundred year event as was said the last time there was flooding a couple of years ago then there is no panic to do anything. As global warming is almost certainly playing a part in this then flooding events are going to be far more frequent than that. Any sensible resident would be expressing that view to the authorities in the strongest terms. Cutting back on the money on prevention measures when these events are going to be more frequent is exactly the wrong thing to do.

[MoreBeta]

I am not going to change your mind inde and likewise you will not change mine.

What I am sure of is that political support is draining away for climate change theory because of the global financial crisis. People have more important things to worry about - like having a job and paying their bills every month. The sooner we stop wasting money on useless and expensive sources of energy the better.

Returning to the OP I think if anyone mentions climate change in the Somerset levels there will be a riot. Its about a lack of dredging and building houses in flood plains - not climate change. I live in a City that floods every few months and it has nothing to do with climate change. They stopped dredging our river in the 1950s and built a huge number of houses in the 1970s onwards and recently paved over large areas of open ground to build industrial estates and that causes rapid run off.

The Council has a climate change strategy though - because it gets money from central Govt to run seminars and promote recycling. Its madness as it does nothing for the local people with flooded houses and local businesses struggling with the massive traffic chaos that happens every time it floods

[inde]

MoreBeta

I said scientists and scientific bodies all over the world supported the consensus on AGW. Not governments. If you are arguing that governments all over the world aren't in favour of reducing CO2 emissions then you are contradicting yourself. You said earlier that it was because governments wanted to follow some left wing policy that they were making sure the science supported their agenda. I see in your last but one post you have shifted from that position anyway and now it's governments of every persuasion. Presumably because you can't explain why the science doesn't change when right wing government's are in power. Your views on AGW seem to be based on politics rather than scientific facts MoreBeta which is why they don't stand up to any scrutiny.

[MoreBeta]

inde - no it is not happening al over the world. Some countries really are not that stupid to put their economy at such massive disadvantage by pursuing an energy policy that raises the cost of energy to uncompetitive levels to solve a problem that may not even exist.

Sure the Chinese have a wind turbine industry - they export those to us at vast expense because we are stupid enough to buy them. Meanwhile the Chinese burn huge quantities of coal to power their own economy.

[MoreBeta]

boulevard - you do know what the data says. You collect it. You don't publish it if it contradicts your theory. You select data that supports your view even if it isn't statistically significant. It is well known that the peer review process of some papers that went into IPCC reports was very heavily criticised for lacking rigour.

Even if published, and even if peer reviewed properly then Govts and IPCC select what data goes into reports. Do you honestly believe a Govt that wants renewable investment to take place and has said so in its manifesto would publish or accept countervailing evidence? The IPCC that only exists because of anthropgenic climate change theory would they report any countervailing evidence? Come on - they would be effectively telling the world to shut them down!

You don't need conspiracy. Its the process that is wholly flawed and everyone in it has vested interest in keeping it going. Its their whole source of income and livelihood. There is almost no independent oversight.

[BoulevardOfBrokenSleep]

Hang on, MoreBeta - you say people stay away from 'research that might produce countervailing data'... can you give an example of what areas you're thinking of?

Because you don't know whether your data will support AGW until you collect it; how would it be possible to deliberately avoid doing research that would contradict it? "Better not study those ice cores in case they show CO2 levels are falling, and I lose my funding"?

Genuinely can't imagine the situation. Any help?

[inde]

So this is happening all over the world MoreBeta? Even though governments change all the time. We haven't had a left wing government for nearly four years now. George Bush jr and his oil industry supporters held sway in the USA for eight of the fourteen years this century. France and Germany didn't have left wing governments for a lot of this time. But somehow there was an invisible left wing force steering science in the direction favourable to their political agenda. I don't see anything to support this except for your anecdotal evidence.

[MoreBeta]

No the scientists produce the data that suits the research agenda that gets the funding. If you don't look or don't publish or cant get funding to do research that might produce countervailing data - well you get the answer you expect.

Thankfully, I retired 10 years ago so I don't have to go through the charade anymore but some of my friends still have to and I feel sorry for them. Nice genuine, honest people who just have to toe the party line because they have to have a job and pay the mortgage. They don't lie or publish falsify data - they just stay away from areas they know will not be looked on favourably and edit what they say and don't criticise the well connected people who have access and control of research funding.

[inde]

Morebeta
What you have just described sounds very like a conspiracy theory to me. There is a vast amount of research that shows AGW is almost certainly a serious problem. You are suggesting that all these scientists are producing all this data because of left wing governments? For one thing a lot of this research was done when Bush Jr. was president and as somebody has already pointed out he had connections to the oil industry. How did he not stop this happening. Governments come and go. To suggest that left wing governments could somehow create this consensus of opinion that every scientific organisation in the world supports really doesn't stand up to critical thinking. It's the kind of thing that James Delingpole comes out with and I doubt that even he believes it.

[MoreBeta]

inde - there really is no conspiracy. I agree.

What is happening is left and centre left leaning Govts around the world use climate change as a convenient excuse to funnel public money and control certain aspects of the economy (i.e. especially energy) as they have always have done. Science is a useful tool to back up policy decisions. Scientists with a need for funding have to go where the funding is and apply for funding in areas that will be funded and all that is Govt money. You cant blame them. Everyone has to eat.

I know this debate inside out and was involved at a very high level in energy research. I know what happened to funding bids from very well respected research groups.

Thankfully the public are losing interest in climate change as the recession grinds on around the World. One day the entire thing will be confined to the dustbin of history as an example of how scientific inquiry can be traduced.

[inde]

It has historical parallels from Communist manipulation of science all the way back to Galileo

I missed that bit. I would be interested to hear you to expound this theory. It seems to have parallels to those on the far right who think AGW is all a communist/NWO plot to take over the world.