we have all been 'had' re global warming

[howmuchdidyousay]

To think its the biggest conspiracy theory of all time ?

Stuffitllllama - Yes, I recognise that, but the scientific consensus is that the speed of the current cycle of climate change IS down to human activity. Yes, the climate has changed over time since the Earth came into existence, but never at this extreme pace.

thanks mr rollmops, enjoyed that.

I watched something on TV this weekend about Noah's Ark, and the upshot was that some scientists believed there was a Noah figure involved in some cataclysmic flood.

It was found that the Black Sea was once a much smaller, fresh water lake, until Global Warming (yes, global warming) caused the Med to flood the Middle East, and raised the level of the Black Sea and made it salty.

In the Sunday Times, on one page, there was an article about how some scientists think we could be heading into a "Day After Tomorrow" like Big Freeze, and rather than taking 20 years, it could take a mere 6 months. Below that same article were warnings to Italy that if Global Warning continues, they'll be unable to grow Durum wheat, and won't be able to make their own pasta any more. Ambiguousness like this makes me very confused.

Either way we're probly fucked, but if global warming has already caused so many disasters of biblical proportions (ice ages, global warmings, ice ages again etc) how arrogant are the human race to assume that Mother Earth is going to stay on an even keel because we would like it to happen?

There is much evidence to prove that global warming is a naturally occuring cycle, and much to prove that man has caused it, but deep down, I hold a very strong suspicion that despite all the millions of pounds/dollars/whatevers spent on researching global warming, scientists are not actually that much nearer to knowing what is going on. All the data on GW maps and forecasts that we are shown are inputed by humans, not Mother Nature herself.

Fantastic Mr Rollmops - well done

It is a bit relevant, because you sound like you actually want to suppress debate.

I cut and pasted because it's 2.30 am and I'm too tired to do anything else as a response to obm, although I do agree with him (largely).

The idea of vested interests -- that too is not why I'm sceptical: there are too many other reasons for that.

Agree with EdgarAllenPoo.

And impressed by BitOfFun's response - how did you find that!

Another for Mr Rollmops (lol at Mr Rollmops having a bigger garden making the headlines)

And I agree we shouldn't be wasting resources and throwing plastic bags into the Pacific and destroying rainforest ecosystems. I just don't believe in significant AGM.

I reckon that given that we're apparently heading into a second ice age and there's also global warming, things should balance each other out and we'll carry on pretty much business as usual. Besides, I've always fancied living at the seaside.

Is this a serious thread?? really?? i can't believe that it is...

i am your (under) average joe, what i know about climate change is what most ordinary folk know. here are my issues

The green industry is a huge industry with lots of money/jobs/funding/political bargaining attached.

who funds the scientific research and is there any that isn't linked to some agenda - funded by money that governments have for green research or oil companies or capitalists?

who do we believe? is there such a thing as independant research?

My view is the eternal sceptic. i doubt it, climates change and always have done.

however we cannot continue to drain the earths resources and land fill the whole planet - that is common sense - not global warming.

Agree Custy, I'm not at all well read on this subject but think that climate change is something that will happen no matter what we are a human race do.

Nothing wrong with recyling and limiting waste and landfill, all for that. But the two issues are seperate.

as not 'are'.

and - i have no research to back this up - but the industrial revolution must have had a huge effect - were this true

and also what about when the planet was in its infancy and volcanos were spewing - that must have been a biggee too

You could always check out the authors and references cited here and then suggest which vested interests have funded it.

Do the sceptics really believe that the "green" industries' spending power/economic significance outweighs that of more than a century of multinational hydrocarbon explorers and sellers? And that it's wind generation and hybrid car companies that fund all of the universities/other public reserach insitutions cited in this?

I'm not an anti-capitalist. I am interested in why there's this attraction in thinking that there's a green conspiracy that gives us all a get-out-of-jail-free card meaning to allow us to carry on with our rapacious, short-termist way of life and keep our fingers crossed that our misgivings about the "conspiracy" turn out to be well-founded.

Finally, if it were all nonsense, what would be in it for governments to push a seemingly unpopular message? There isn't massive taxation of carbon-hungry activities and lots of environmental organisations bemoan this. Just think about all the criticism of unbridled expansion of air travel, road-building, coal and gas-fired power stations. So still waiting for anything convincing about parties that gain from the "conspiracy" on a scale that eclipses the gains of established hydrocarbon-based industry.

You don't want to lump all "eco" campaigns together.

I find Mr Rollmops convincing re: global warming, I'm a geologist too. We live on a turbulent and active planet.

That doesn't take away from the fact that we as humans are still making immense irreversible changes to the planet in terms of fossil fuel, biodiversity and waste disposal. Is that really what we want to pass on to our children?

Custardo - the industrial revolution didn't a global impact in late 18th century. Think of the difference in scale introduced by joined-up energy networks, automated industrial processes and mass consumer demand, as against a few countries moving forward quickly in industrial terms and the vast majority lagging behind until the 20th century or later.

What about this then OP?

After the last ice age ended there was a period of increased earthquakes and volcanic activity in response to the huge weight being removed from the earths crust due to glacier melt. That's the immediate effect of this current period of glacier retreat. And developing countries, those who have been largely blameless wrt carbon emissions, our poorest and least able to cope with such disaters will be worst hit. Yet again, developing countries pay for our greed.

Stick your head in the sand all you want, it's still gonna happen, and reams of scientific evidence about cliamte change backs that up. Problem is, we're not going to suffer the worst of it, our kids, grandkids and great-grandkids are. That makes it nice and easy to pooh-pooh, but do you want your descendants cursing your selfishness as they eke out a living from our future inhospitable earth, our poisonous legacy? Or are you gonna make a few small lifestyle changes, pressure your politicians to do better on this issue and be a part of the fecking solution?

OK, let's pretend assume that GW isn't really happening.

Would it hurt any of us on this planet to think about what waste we do create, what impact we do cause, what damage we do reek?

No.

So let's just live the best way we can, not overfishing, chopping down habitat, polluting, dumping our crap here there and everywhere... vast floating plastic islands in the oceans etc etc.

Anything we can do to alleviate the impact of whatever it is that will change the climate and wipe us out has to be done, otherwise all our supposed intelligence is for nothing.

It used to be called Global warming but people started noticing that it wasn't getting any hotter so the powers that be changed it to "climate change".

I would be more convinced of the apocolypse version of global warming when Gordon Brown or Prince Charles et al stop jetting around the world to debate global warming. They could video conference instead. Or is it just the plebs that are expected to actually do something about our carbon footprint?

TBH I find my tolerance for Eco preaching at an all time low.

jkklpu. I don't know what governments are gaining out of the green issues. We are allowed to, look back into history as it's been written and dispite having it rammed down our throats that we are causing/contributing to the melting ice caps, think it's all bolleux.

Will carry on recycling though, it's a great idea.

I do recycle, shop locally, don't drive - I think it is a good idea to respect our planet.

However, my current theory is the fear of global warming is the new religion. The political elite have noticed that most of us don't really do God so have lost a handy tool to control us by fear. Global warming is a nice fit.

I don't think the political elite need global warming to control us with fear when they have a rather more immediate and biting threat in global recession and economic meltdown. Most people I know find being made redundant, losing their house and money all a lot more scary than climate change, it's a bit more immediate. Not to mention the hotline to fear central that Dubyah and Bliar exploited with the war on terror BS that seems to rally the fearful right-wing so effectively.

Crackfox, I was just thinking the same. We look back in history and cannot help laughing at how people were 'had' believing that if they blasphem they will be struck down or a member of royalty is executed the world will end. Recently the year 2000 compliancy. Planes dropping out of the sky or even worse lol. If anyone breathes in second hand smoke it will cause.... Ok I will quit now but the list could go on and on.

You know for centuries the church was used as a weapon by those in power to oppress the population.Making people do things to avoid eternal damnation and loadening them down with guilt.
the whole global warming thing has many of the same traits !

Just an observation

Cross posted with some of you !!