Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To not understand why this storm is being blamed on climate change

106 replies

Bringringbring · 09/02/2020 16:35

If it was the worst on record, I’d get it.

But this country has suffered some appalling storms in the past

The snow storm of ‘47 when 10ft drifts developed
The ‘53 storm that claimed almost 400 lives
Feb ‘63 - 1 coldest ever recorded of -21
‘76 worst drought ever

Looking worldwide - the worst storm ever recorded was in.... 1900 (Galveston)

Had any of these events occurred today - climate change would be listed by many as their cause. However at the time - there wasn’t a whisper of it.

If storm records were being beaten, I’d “get it.
But there not. And I suppose that’s why I’m struggling to link climate change with storms.

Can anyone enlighten me? Genuine question

OP posts:
chomalungma · 09/02/2020 21:53

A snap of the fingers of some 25k yrs and draw conclusions about the billions of years the planet has supported life

Life finds a way.

Humans need to adapt to survive.
Do you think humans need to adapt to climate change?

chomalungma · 09/02/2020 21:54

And many do not agree with the claims that human impact on climate change is a crisis or emergency or an eco-apocalypse type of scenario

If you had say 1000 scientists, how many do you think would agree that climate change is happening and the world needs to make changes?

PlanDeRaccordement · 09/02/2020 21:57

Thanks for retracting your earlier statement about the ecosystems outside 22k years ago not supporting human life, blobby.

Blibbyblobby · 09/02/2020 22:01

Thanks for retracting your earlier statement about the ecosystems outside 22k years ago not supporting human life, blobby.

Ah, you misunderstood again I'm afraid.

I didn't retract it because I didn't say it.

You misunderstood. I clarified. I haven't changed anything about what I originally said.

PlanDeRaccordement · 09/02/2020 22:02

Not bullshit, climate stripes by Ed Hawkins show quite clearly.

Lol except his climate strips starting line is a mere 26k ago. Hah hah hah
And humans have been around for 150x that. He’s showing 150th of the whole picture. Or 1 second out of almost 2minutes of human life.
I prefer to base my opinion on the full 2 mins not a 1 second frame.

chomalungma · 09/02/2020 22:02

Carbon dioxide levels are increasing.
At their highest level for 800,000 years
Which is of course only a tiny fraction of geological time but the levels are rising which increases the greenhouse effect.

We have warming oceans - which could lead to less CO2 being absorbed by the oceans. Thus creating a feedback loop.

More energy in the weather is going to create more extreme weather events. Flooding being one.

Warmer climates will lead to crop shortages - and maybe a change in the food we grow.

Of course the human race will adapt and survive. We should try and reduce the impact we have though,.

Unless people think any of that is untrue.

Blibbyblobby · 09/02/2020 22:03

To remind you Plan, what I said, as you yourself quoted, was " at more distant times in our planet's past it has been both way hotter and way colder than the bounds of this chart. However it's also true to say that during those periods, most of the planet wouldn't have supported the current ecosystem, which includes human life."

I certainly didn't say it was too hot or too cold to support human life at all times outside the 22,000 years Grin

chomalungma · 09/02/2020 22:04

I prefer to base my opinion on the full 2 mins not a 1 second frame

Do you think that the human race should be trying to reduce the level of CO2 emitted?

Do you think that the human race needs to worry about a warming climate and the effects this will have on the world?

PlanDeRaccordement · 09/02/2020 22:15

IPCC are not very scientific these days.

The CO2 level has actually steadily decreased from 2600ppm, the level 140 million years ago, to today’s level of about 400ppm.

The rate of temperature increase did not track with the rate of CO2 concentration increase for the past 300 years of warming.

During the 18 years between 1998 and 2014, CO2 increased, yet the temperature didn’t. From a geological-time point of view, current climate change is consistent with the natural evolution of Earth’s climate.

The IPCC has “changed” its modelling assumptions
Assuming nothing changes except for CO2 levels, each doubling of the CO2 concentration would result in a global temperature increase of about 1 degree Celsius. This number is referred to as CO2 sensitivity.

In the more complex models, this number is modified based on experimental data and scientists’ understanding of the interactions among factors such as clouds, oceans, geology, etc.
The first Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report in 1990 and the second IPCC report in 1995 used a mean CO2 sensitivity of 2.5C. The third IPCC report in 2001 used a mean CO2 sensitivity of 2.8C the fourth report in 2007 used 3.3C and so on.

They’re changing their assumptions to fit their theory- not very scientific of them!

An article in 2014 on C3headlines.com was titled, “Climate Agencies Confirm IPCC’s Climate Model Output Extremely Unlikely – Since 1990s, Wrong 95% of Time.”

Heymacarana · 09/02/2020 22:28

The hottest years on record have been clustered in the past 2 decades

You are joking? Please tell me you are joking!

The clue is in the bit that says “on record” think it’s through.

wonderstuff · 09/02/2020 22:30

So what are your credentials that make you so sure you know better than the IPCC?

chomalungma · 09/02/2020 22:32

I notice you aren't bothering to answer questions on whether the human race needs to worry about the increase global average temperature.

Some NASA facts

climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/

PlanDeRaccordement · 09/02/2020 22:33

When even Greenpeace is disagreeing with IPCC and saying ocean acidification is a lie...
www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/22095-in-paris-scientists-debunk-un-climate-hysteria

“Also blacked out of the media has been the NIPCC report, in which scientists examined the peer-reviewed science and came to dramatically different conclusions from the UN IPCC.“

“Dr. Robert Carter, former chief of the School of Earth Sciences at James Cook University. “Global warming is not happening,” he explained, even noting that long-term cooling was predicted. Carter's presentation was especially fascinating because it totally shredded the outlandish notion that CO2 — exhaled by humans and critical to life — is “carbon pollution” in need of regulation. In fact, he said, even at current atmospheric concentrations, the Earth and the plants it supports are “starving” for more CO2. And in the past, CO2 concentrations were some 10 to 15 times higher. “Attempting to stop climate change is an exercise in utter futility,” he added, noting in an interview with The New American that nobody would seriously consider trying to “stop” earthquakes or volcanic eruptions.”
“University of Virginia Professor Emeritus Dr. Fred Singer, founder of the Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP) and the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change. “There has been no statistically significant warming in 18 years,” he told the summit, showing a slide comparing observed temperatures with the various bogus predictions made by “climate models” relied upon by the UN, all of which predicted warming as CO2 increased. “The models don't work. We should not use them to make policy.”
“Greenpeace co-founder Dr. Patrick Moore, who gave a presentation thoroughly debunking the myth of “ocean acidification.” In the real world, he said, there is “no conceivable scenario” in which the world's oceans would become acidic. “It is a complete fabrication with no basis in reality,” he said. In fact, CO2 does wonders for marine life, Dr. Moore showed, noting that the most productive area of the ocean, the Humboldt Current, is also the most “acidic.” “CO2 is fertilizing the oceans just like it is greening the Earth,” he said. In an interview with The New American after his presentation, Moore also identified the real agenda behind the UN climate summit: bringing down industrial civilization. If successful, he said, the lives of countless human beings will be lost as a result.”

“Dr. Christopher Essex, associated chair in the Department of Applied Mathematics at the University of Western Ontario, also spoke at the summit, taking on various myths about the “climate” that are being peddled by politicians and “journalists” who he said have no clue what they are talking about. Trying to explain the unfathomably complex nature of the climate system, Essex said the whole “climate” conversation was absurd. One of his slides comically noted, “Over 95 percent of the models agree: The observations must be wrong.”
After the scientists gave their presentations, a panel discussion highlighted the massive damage being done — especially to the poor — by so called “climate” policies. Among those speaking was Lord Christopher Monckton, a giant in the climate realist movement. Climate alarmists have “the money, power, and glory, but we have the truth, so they have nothing, and we have everything.” If the UN summit succeeds in its goals, though, millions of people will die, he said.”

PlanDeRaccordement · 09/02/2020 22:36

Non the human race has no worry! We survived much higher temperature changes in the past and will do so in the future.
You forget we have been through dozens of Ice Ages and interglacial periods with no frozen poles with nothing more than animals skins and stone tools. I think we can just about manage with today’s technology.

chomalungma · 09/02/2020 22:38

When even Greenpeace is disagreeing with IPCC and saying ocean acidification is a lie

You do know that the person no longer has any association with Greenpeace?

www.greenpeace.org/usa/news/greenpeace-statement-on-patric/

Patrick Moore often misrepresents himself in the media as an environmental “expert” or even an “environmentalist,” while offering anti-environmental opinions on a wide range of issues and taking a distinctly anti-environmental stance. He also exploits long-gone ties with Greenpeace to sell himself as a speaker and pro-corporate spokesperson, usually taking positions that Greenpeace opposes

You should really do some research.

chomalungma · 09/02/2020 22:42

Non the human race has no worry! We survived much higher temperature changes in the past and will do so in the future

Of course we will survive. - but there are lots of issues that the human race needs to worry about.

wonderstuff · 09/02/2020 22:43

What a bizarre thing to be arguing. Antarctica hit 18°C this week. Australia has seen shocking fires. Glaciers are retreating. 99% of climate scientists agree. This has been being studied and modelled for over 40 years and yet you believe it's a conspiracy theory?

Heymacarana · 10/02/2020 01:42

What a bizarre thing to be arguing. Antarctica hit 18°C this week. Australia has seen shocking fires. Glaciers are retreating. 99% of climate scientists agree. This has been being studied and modelled for over 40 years and yet you believe it's a conspiracy theory?

Are you taking the piss?

What was the temperature in Antarctica a million years ago?

You even say in your own lost it has been monitored for 40 years!!

You can type, so surely you realise that’s a fraction of a percentage of the time that earth has actually existed?

karencantobe · 10/02/2020 02:10

Bloody hell. I have read this thread open mouthed. Yes climate change caused by human activity is a major issue.
And life will find a way? Yes it will, but that will not be human life. Most species become extinct eventually, but other species do not generally cause their own extinction. It won't happen in the foreseeable, but it will happen.

karencantobe · 10/02/2020 02:14

This is good.

skepticalscience.com/argument.php

PixieRabbit · 10/02/2020 02:52

The climate stripes look like a really nice beach towel I’ll be taking on my next long haul flight to the Maldives. (It’s one of those “bargain” flights that goes via Auckland, Ulaanbaatar and Medicine Hat, like in that episode of Black Books.)

Isn’t farmed wind just cruel? It should be wild and free to uproot trees and rip roofs (rooves?) off houses with gay abandon, like mother nature (when she’s run out of HRT) intended.

Bringringbring · 10/02/2020 05:38

* And life will find a way? Yes it will, but that will not be human life. Most species become extinct eventually, but other species do not generally cause their own extinction. It won't happen in the foreseeable, but it will happen.*

Tha absolute certainty of this post makes me chuckle.

OP posts:
chomalungma · 10/02/2020 07:12

so OP

What effects of climate change do worry you?

TheOnlyLivingBoyInNewCross · 10/02/2020 07:37

I find it incredible that there are still people who exist (who aren't Donald Trump but presumably completely normal people with normal IQs) who deny the existence and ramifications of climate change.

It must take real effort to be so wilfully ignorant.

wonderstuff · 10/02/2020 07:38

No one's saying that the world wasn't warmer in the past, it's the rate of change.

Anyway, I'm walking away from this thread, the idea that the IPCC are on a mission to bring down industrial civilisation is just a bit too crazy to argue against.

Swipe left for the next trending thread