Still no talk of global warming.

[biffvernon]

Last September WillPenn started a discussion with the title "IPCC report: Why is no one on Mumsnet talking about climate change?"

We just had the third report from the IPCC AR5, on mitigation, and still there doesn't seem to be anyone discussing global warming. Surely it can't be the case that mums don't care about the world their children inherit, or think that looking after the planet is just a bloke thing. So why is it?

[somewherebecomingrain]

biff yup we need to start reducing carbon emissions now. And that requires powerful people across the world to work together. I'm not sure how I can affect that. I'm not an activist - I'm not that kind of person. I always vote green as a protest but what more can I do?

Should we be talking to the people in our community/ networks. I'm too shy - talking seriously about climate change esp to people with kids is like a bad smell.

I suppose we need some demonstrations - but what do they ever achieve?

I am respectfully ignoring the 'non-believers' on these threads - let's just get on with this conversation.

[caroldecker]

There are many reasons people don't believe:

1. they can't see it (you may not know how a plane works, but it does)
   
2. dodgy statistics used on multiple occasions by the IPCC and others - may be accidental but looks bad
   
3. the models have all predicted more warming than has occurred over the last 10 years, suggesting they are biased
   
4. The hysterical outpourings (multiple 'tipping' points here suggests the climate scientists are crying wolf
   
5. Refusal to share data/emails - may be irrelevant but looks like cover-up
   
6. The benefits (in some parts of the world) are ignored, again looks like trying to frighten people
   
7. as suggested above - it will not destroy the world - may destroy the human race and some species, but life will go on in many varied and wonderful forms - after all, it was only a mass extintion event which allowed us to become the globally dominant species. I have no idea why people are determined to make the earth stay exactly as it was at one specific time (normally about 10 years before thier childhood)
   
8. It won't impact me as i will be dead anyway
   
9. the costs (financial and social) of change today may be more than delaing with the impact

[OhYouBadBadKitten]

I didnt say the threads would be encouraging :(
We are in the middle of a crisis and so many people are sticking their heads in the sand or resorting to pseudoscience to deny what is evidently there.

[biffvernon]

I've had a look through a lot of those posts, OhYouBadBadKitten. I'm not sure whether to be encouraged that there has been a lot more conversation than my original search (not using advanced search) revealed, or whether I should be really depressed at the level of ignorance and stupidity displayed by a significant proportion of the posts. Yes, I know, that's going to sound more than 'just a bit riling' to some, but I've given up wasting time being polite to deniers and down right liars.
The human race has an existential crisis and a lot of people are just talking rubbish, ensuring that the worst happens.

[OhYouBadBadKitten]

Advanced search picks up so much more than search. Dunno why.

It is a really important issue and you are right it needs to be talked about, your opening post was just a bit riling.

[claig]

Rand Paul is not going away and Nigel Farage is not going away. Cleggy probably hoped that Farage would go away over Europe. I am afraid you will have to win a debate with them if you think your case is strong enough. People will not believe lies forever.

Natalie Bennett and the Greens can say things like climate change is the biggest threat to the planet and human existence etc but unless they can convince the public, the public will continue to vote UKIP in far greater numbers than they vote Green. Scare stories won't work, debate is the only way. Cleggy knew that; he had a debate on the EU, but he lost it.

[biffvernon]

Thank-you OhYouBadBadKitten for those links - I hadn't tried the advanced search. I'll go and take a look through them.

I guess the people who do not accept the science fall into two groups, first those who are open-minded but just have not studied the science and don't yet understand what is going on. I hope I have a lot of patience with such folk and do what I can to explain the science to those who will listen. And then there are the real deniers, a curious bunch about whom much has been written but I prefer to ignore them in the optimistic hope that they will go away.

[Nocomet]

Because I have a Y11 who has had global warming in science and geography lesson for the past 5 years.

If you mention it there is likely to be an atomic explosion.

[claig]

Cleggy won't change, we know that. He'll stick with the EU and climate catastrophe (which is just what the masters like). Cleggy will probably challenge Farage to a debate on "climate catastrophe" next in order to "make the case". But, if he makes that mistake, Farage will only wipe the floor with him yet again.

[claig]

Some newspapers have reported that Rand paul is teh frontrunner for Republican presidential nominee and that he may even become the next US President. These are Rand Paul's brave words. Whether he is able to stick to them and defy the masters is still up in the air for now.

"Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul mocked concerns about global warming, rising sea levels and endangered polar bears Thursday, accusing the White House of being run by "extremists" and "hysterics" who don't care about jobs.

...

"I'm afraid what's happened is we've opened up the White House and this administration to environmental extremists -- the kind of people who say, 'Well, the polar bears are drowning,' " Paul said, contending that the bear fears are based only on one photo of a few bears on an ice flow."


www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/10/rand-paul-mocks-drowning-_n_1086309.html

It doesn't matter what "climate scientists" say, what really matters is which power elite is in power and what countries like Russia, China and India do. So far the discussion has been dominated by the alarmists, but times are changing and more and more political parties (e.g. UKIP) and senior politicians (e.g. Rand Paul) are calling bluff. Even Call me Dave has allegedly seen the light and said let's "cut the green crap".

[claig]

Fracking is slightly different, because there is a case that it may cause environmental damage and harm health etc. When I first heard the Greens discuss it, they still banged on about fossil fuels, which seems strange, since the people are more worried about health than climate, and if they really want to stop it then that is the argument they should use. I don't know if the Greens have now changed their approach and oppose it on health grounds or not.

[claig]

Even our Prime Minister, Dave Cameron, has allegedly been heard to say "cut the green crap", and that, if true, is a very brave move for a Prime Minister to make, because the masters will not be pleased at all.

But they won't be able to stop UKIP saying it. So the cat is out of the bag and they won't get their way on climate catastrophe. We have now passed the "tipping point", the climate scare is over.

[OhYouBadBadKitten]

another thread

one on fracking

another on fracking

more talk

plenty to get your teeth into :)

[OhYouBadBadKitten]

ok some of threads are mishits by the mn search engine but why havent you been on the threads I linked to?

[OhYouBadBadKitten]

a thread

another thread

another one

Climate change came up in 316 discussions this year on advanced search when I searched for it. I can't vouch for the quality of the discussion on each of them. I didnt search for global warming as per your thread title because its a really unhelpful term.

[mercibucket]

we have already passed the tipping point imo. so the rest is 'deck chairs - titanic'

[biffvernon]

Suggest a better search term please, OhYouBadBadKitten but when I put 'climate change' into the search box not a single result from 2014 was returned. The most recent post I found was the one I quoted at the top from last September.

Skipping lightly past the less than polite comments above, a number of comments have dwelt on whether folk 'believe' the science or not. Now I don't know much about brain surgery, or aeronautic engineering or a number of other scientific areas but I wouldn't go up to a doctor or aircraft mechanic and say "Nah, I don't believe your stuff, hospitals can't make you well and that plane can't fly".

I do know rather a lot about climate science but I don't often talk to people who are not absolutely certain that global warming is real and that it is caused mostly by humans burning fossil fuel. That's certain as in we're sure that when an apple falls from a tree it falls downwards, the physics of gravity being understood almost as well as the physics of radiative absorption of greenhouse gasses. Of course there are uncertainties. We just can't be quite sure beforehand which daisy the apple will end up closest to. There are some complex dynamics involved in bouncing apples on bumpy orchard turf. The climate system is also pretty complicated so there are some uncertainties as to just how quickly the climate will change and how quickly the ice will melt, how people will adapt to their cities being flooded and agricultural productivity declining, where wars will be triggered by droughts and all the other miseries that are sure to be inflicted upon some or all of us.

What we do know, with absolute certainty, is that the current trajectory that we are on will lead to utter catastrophe and that the opportunity to change that trajectory is now and must not be missed if future generations are to survive. Our task, today and over the next several months, is to ensure that all the world's governments agree to rapid and drastic greenhouse gas emissions. They will only do that if they know that we, their electorates, accept what the climate scientists say and demand action now, even at a cost to ourselves, for the sake of our descendants.

I'm sorry if that message upsets or offends some folk but the truth does sometimes hurt, especially when our way of life is so directly threatened. However, I prefer to see the changes we need to make in a positive light, producing a better, fairer, cleaner, healthier world for all to live in. The threat of catastrophic climate change may just, if we act quickly, provoke us into creating a better future. What's not to like?

[stargirl1701]

I think it is reassuring. Human beings aren't as important as they think they are. We are just one species.

[OhYouBadBadKitten]

There has been plenty of discussion of Climate change. Perhaps you are searching for the wrong term?

[ThatBloodyWoman]

I would like to see more talk of global warming and environmental issues everywhere.

The thing is that I find debate difficult because of the use of over intellectualised vocabulary, which, to be frank, I don't understand.

I am clever enough to see what's in front of my face though.But I'm more of an 'action' woman.

Basically I think it's a case of 'A little less conversation, a little more action'

When people finally wake up and realise its too late, I want to be able to say that I did something, rather than sat on an internet forum talking about doing something....

[somewherebecomingrain]

Ps I'm pretty ignorant about it

[somewherebecomingrain]

I am happy for people not to believe in climate change. I understand it is contested - there is a lot of debate and a lot of uncertainty if you drill down into it.

I'm not hostile to diversity of opinion, and claig your posts are interesting.

But where are the people who do believe? For those of us that do there is a lot to talk about.

My belief is we can deal with climate change or at least avert human extinction, through technology and renewables and adaptation. But it won't be easy. But it's kind of fun in a way, like war is fun, brings us all together. And there are lots of little bits of good news like the US has done a lot on renewables and the UN is making some positive moves to broker international agreement.

Anyway I will be coming back to this thread

[somewherebecomingrain]

stargirl thanks for pointing that out - phew, we're-all-going-to-die but the planet will survive. That's reassuring.

[caroldecker]

Partly it is not believed, partly because 2-4 degrees sounds v small when uk temperature varies between 30 and minus 10 and partly because there have been many scares over the years which come to nothing - Y2K anyone

[claig]

'Why is no one on Mumsnet talking about climate change?'

It is simple really. It was what LtEveDallas said. They don't believe it is real or true. And that is also why not many people vote for the Greens either. They don't believe it. They have to say they do in case they are called "flat-earthers" by important bigwigs like Gordon Brown, who also called Mrs Duffy a "bigoted woman" when she asked him a question. But the reality is that when it is time to vote, they don't believe it.

They have far more pressing concerns that they feel are real rather than imaginary.

It is harsh to hear and hard to understand that if you are a believer in climate catastrophe, just as some religious believers have trouble understanding why other peopke don't see things their way on religion too.