- #1712106halcyonMemberMember since: May 4, 2014
Replies: 4913halcyon February 20, 2019 at 10:11 am
I agree Brian. There is too much emotive claptrap being presented. At the scientific level there is still debate between researchers.
There is evidence that we have moved through a period of high solar activity and are now moving into a period of lower solar activity. What effect will this have on global temperatures?
In the past there appears to have been a relationship between solar activity and global temperatures. Is this a contributing factor in our current temperatures?
In addition, there appears evidence of a link between the current emphasis on climate change and a move towards a single world governing body. Is this the underlying motivation for the focus on climate change?
Those are the questions I would like answers to.
It's ok if you disagree with me. I can't force you to be right.#1712111supergoldMemberMember since: May 9, 2009
Replies: 8918supergold February 20, 2019 at 11:29 am
Paulinem, you and I will simply have to agree to disagree.
In the past there appears to have been a relationship between solar activity and global temperatures. Is this a contributing factor in our current temperatures? In addition, there appears evidence of a link between the current emphasis on climate change and a move towards a single world governing body. Is this the underlying motivation for the focus on climate change? Those are the questions I would like answers to.
Agree totally Halcyon. I would like the answers to those questions too but it seems even the scientists have trouble agreeing on the cause and in particular I can’t help but wonder if the NWO is behind all of this confusion.
#1712120paulinemMemberMember since: July 8, 2006
- This reply was modified 4 months ago by supergold.
Replies: 914paulinem February 20, 2019 at 1:00 pm
New world order IS NOT going to HAPPEN … Halycon you are been stupid and obsessed with idea and by continuing saying this is a possibility. NWO … WILL not happen as we human beings we are far to diverse in thinking etc of creatures to allow this to happen. Hitler tried and FAILED the Japan leader tried and FAILED ……. Trump and his followers will try and will FAIL. Many Many throughout the course of our world history have tried and ALL Failed !!!
Scientist are NOT as disagreeing as Byran suggests. What we have unfortunately is scientist that have allowed the oil industry to buy their support to deny CC by using their ill gotten money to pay these fake scientist to write articles such as supergold put up to deny Climate change is a reality. Yes CC is frightening and if allowed to continue polluting our planet and climate destroying our environment then we need to be frightened !
CC is happening all around the world, because of burning of oil mostly in transport which is sending CO2 into the atmosphere and destroying the barriers that stopped extreme weather destroying our environment for thousands of years . The oil industry are on the way to exit out as a power force due to discovery of using electricity instead of oil to power our transport.
We can all see with out own environment climate that its real, I know where I live it is obvious that it has changed since I was younger. We need to face it that REAL INNOCENT humans in various parts of the globe ( as I mention in previous posts ) are suffering because CC has destroyed their way of life. We can help them by using less oil in our lives as our power source, and use less oil byproducts like plastic .
#1712124mommabear70MemberMember since: February 20, 2017
- This reply was modified 4 months ago by paulinem.
Replies: 1852mommabear70 February 20, 2019 at 2:19 pm
The New World Order has been in existence for approximately 100 years and is continuing it’s work in progress.
The Climate Change scam is a part of the NWO.
Governments around the world who’ve signed up to this scam are fleecing taxpayers of over $2 trillion annually.
In contrast, the oil industry has donated a trifling $100 million to those not taken in by the global warming scam.
It’s encouraging to read many of our district councils are not signing up to the scam.#1712125halcyonMemberMember since: May 4, 2014
Replies: 4913halcyon February 20, 2019 at 2:28 pm
And this is the problem paulinem. As soon as a scientist presents research findings that question whether climate change is caused by people’s actions they are branded as having ” allowed the oil industry to buy their support to deny CC by using their ill gotten money to pay these fake scientist to write articles”.
Not all scientists who question the role of human behaviour benefit financially from funding by any external source. But it is an easy way to marginalise their findings. It saves the difficulty of debating the issues.
It is this behaviour by climate change supporters that actually brings into question their rational for their position. Insistence that all believe the same does not have the same effect in changing opinion as open debate.
It's ok if you disagree with me. I can't force you to be right.
#1712130Hero42 February 20, 2019 at 3:42 pm
- This reply was modified 4 months ago by halcyon.
You say not all scientists agree on climate change which is true but not accurate. It gives the impression that there is a heated debate going on with most scientists in disagreement.
For accuracy it is more accurate to state that 97% of scientists agree climate change is occurring and is caused by mankind’s activity.
And if you want to check that figure then check the following:
Authors of seven climate consensus studies — including Naomi Oreskes, Peter Doran, William Anderegg, Bart Verheggen, Ed Maibach, J. Stuart Carlton, and John Cook — co-authored a paper that should settle the expert climate consensus question once and for all. The two key conclusions from the paper are:
1) Depending on exactly how you measure the expert consensus, it’s somewhere between 90% and 100% that agree humans are responsible for climate change, with most of our studies finding 97% consensus among publishing climate scientists.
2) The greater the climate expertise among those surveyed, the higher the consensus on human-caused global warming.
Cheers 🙂#1712131Hero42 February 20, 2019 at 3:51 pm
Now on the subject of solar activity let’s look at the science and the facts.
As supplier of almost all the energy in Earth’s climate, the sun has a strong influence on climate. A comparison of sun and climate over the past 1150 years found temperatures closely match solar activity (Usoskin 2005). However, after 1975, temperatures rose while solar activity showed little to no long-term trend. This led the study to conclude, “…during these last 30 years the solar total irradiance, solar UV irradiance and cosmic ray flux has not shown any significant secular trend, so that at least this most recent warming episode must have another source.”
In fact, a number of independent measurements of solar activity indicate the sun has shown a slight cooling trend since 1960, over the same period that global temperatures have been warming. Over the last 35 years of global warming, sun and climate have been moving in opposite directions. An analysis of solar trends concluded that the sun has actually contributed a slight cooling influence in recent decades (Lockwood 2008).
If you want more studies in this area I can give another 19. All come to the same conclusion so I am afraid your hope that the latest changes in the solar cycle will have a cooling effect are unfounded.
Cheers 🙂#1712136Hero42 February 20, 2019 at 4:05 pm
Can you give a source for the $2 Trillion annually figure that you say is being fleeced from taxpayers?
You are by any chance getting it mixed up with the cost of climate change as reported here:
But I am glad to see you admit that the oil industry is paying to confuse the issue and try and block change.
However you have considerably under reported the amount.
Organised campaigning to undermine public trust in climate science is associated with conservative economic policies and backed by industrial interests opposed to the regulation of CO2 emissions. Climate change denial has been associated with the fossil fuels lobby, the Koch brothers, industry advocates and conservative think tanks, often in the United States. More than 90% of papers sceptical on climate change originate from right-wing think tanks. The total annual income of these climate change counter-movement-organizations is roughly $900 million.
Nearly $120 million was anonymously donated via the Donors Trust and Donors Capital Fund to more than 100 organisations seeking to undermine the public perception of the science on climate change. In 2013 the Center for Media and Democracy reported that the State Policy Network (SPN), an umbrella group of 64 U.S. think tanks, had been lobbying on behalf of major corporations and conservative donors to oppose climate change regulation
And if you want to check that figure it comes from Robert Brulle (2014). “Institutionalizing delay: foundation funding and the creation of U.S. climate change counter-movement organizations”.
Given that figure is 5 years old goodness knows how much they are spending on the area now.
Nothing like getting the details to check is there?
Cheers 🙂#1712137Hero42 February 20, 2019 at 4:14 pm
Can you give us some references to scientists who are publishing papers that question whether climate change is caused by people’s actions just so we can check that they are both independent and qualified.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.