Loading...
Next Match: Image
Basel in the Champions League.
Wednesday 22nd November 2017, KO 19:45 UTC.
User avatar
Dante
Referee
Referee
Posts: 8324
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2007 5:16 pm

Re: Climate Change

Sat Feb 18, 2017 4:28 pm

They are quite clearly not leaders in human rights, but their work on renewable energy cannot be contested.

With the growth they are going through, they have little choice really.


Image

User avatar
Relly
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 5951
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 2:41 am
Call Me: Ben

Re: Climate Change

Sat Feb 18, 2017 5:26 pm

Image
"Make America Great Again!"

User avatar
Dante
Referee
Referee
Posts: 8324
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2007 5:16 pm

Re: Climate Change

Sun Feb 19, 2017 8:34 am

OK, and?
Image

User avatar
marcus leong
Referee
Referee
Posts: 6021
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 6:31 am

Re: Climate Change

Thu Mar 02, 2017 5:44 pm

A bit long but very good discussion between one scientist and climate skeptics.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5JmptSCkAgw
Rick: "Weddings are basically funerals with cake."

User avatar
JonSnow
Academy Player
Academy Player
Posts: 167
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 3:11 am

Re: Climate Change

Sat Mar 04, 2017 6:59 am

Some people are not taking this thing seriously. We all just have to start with ourselves. Is it too hard for people to throw their trash in the proper bins and not mindlessly throw it somewhere on the street? Of course, having the governmental support will be a big step. We should all be conscious of our actions if we want to preserve this world for the next generations.

User avatar
marcus leong
Referee
Referee
Posts: 6021
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 6:31 am

Re: Climate Change

Sun Mar 05, 2017 4:22 pm

Shell produced climate change video back in 1991...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTmS0exb7r8
Rick: "Weddings are basically funerals with cake."

User avatar
marcus leong
Referee
Referee
Posts: 6021
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 6:31 am

Re: Climate Change

Fri Mar 10, 2017 3:35 am

JonSnow wrote:
Sat Mar 04, 2017 6:59 am
Some people are not taking this thing seriously. We all just have to start with ourselves. Is it too hard for people to throw their trash in the proper bins and not mindlessly throw it somewhere on the street? Of course, having the governmental support will be a big step. We should all be conscious of our actions if we want to preserve this world for the next generations.
While individual effort might affect a little, it won't be enough if government and buisenesses do not change.
Rick: "Weddings are basically funerals with cake."

User avatar
marcus leong
Referee
Referee
Posts: 6021
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 6:31 am

Re: Climate Change

Fri Mar 10, 2017 3:54 am

The indirect link of climate change and terrorism.

http://time.com/4113801/climate-change-terrorism/
Rick: "Weddings are basically funerals with cake."

User avatar
JonSnow
Academy Player
Academy Player
Posts: 167
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 3:11 am

Re: Climate Change

Fri Mar 10, 2017 8:21 am

marcus leong wrote:
Fri Mar 10, 2017 3:35 am
JonSnow wrote:
Sat Mar 04, 2017 6:59 am
Some people are not taking this thing seriously. We all just have to start with ourselves. Is it too hard for people to throw their trash in the proper bins and not mindlessly throw it somewhere on the street? Of course, having the governmental support will be a big step. We should all be conscious of our actions if we want to preserve this world for the next generations.
While individual effort might affect a little, it won't be enough if government and buisenesses do not change.
perfectly true, the government should see the effort that some of the individuals make and they should spread the advocacy as a whole. I know that the UN and other organizations are doing those already. Sadly, most people are just ignoring it. :( :x

User avatar
marcus leong
Referee
Referee
Posts: 6021
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 6:31 am

Re: Climate Change

Mon Mar 13, 2017 6:59 am

Why climate change researchers are freaking out

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhiDcrUxq5I
Rick: "Weddings are basically funerals with cake."

User avatar
Dante
Referee
Referee
Posts: 8324
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2007 5:16 pm

Re: Climate Change

Thu Mar 23, 2017 10:27 am

marcus leong wrote:
Fri Mar 10, 2017 3:35 am
JonSnow wrote:
Sat Mar 04, 2017 6:59 am
Some people are not taking this thing seriously. We all just have to start with ourselves. Is it too hard for people to throw their trash in the proper bins and not mindlessly throw it somewhere on the street? Of course, having the governmental support will be a big step. We should all be conscious of our actions if we want to preserve this world for the next generations.
While individual effort might affect a little, it won't be enough if government and buisenesses do not change.
One individual effort means little. 60 million individual efforts means a lot more.

But government efforts will move things much more. Currently the UK recycles 43%, the EU targets 50% by 2020. Really, we could do a lot more, but many local authorities don't have the facilities to recycle things that can be recycled. Tetra packs and many types of plastic for example.
Image

User avatar
marcus leong
Referee
Referee
Posts: 6021
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 6:31 am

Re: Climate Change

Mon Apr 03, 2017 9:35 am

I found it bizarre that somehow politicians is not fluent in any other science except the science of climate change.

Rick: "Weddings are basically funerals with cake."

User avatar
marcus leong
Referee
Referee
Posts: 6021
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 6:31 am

Re: Climate Change

Mon May 08, 2017 1:49 am

This is interesting. Brain drain for US soon?

Rick: "Weddings are basically funerals with cake."

User avatar
Relly
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 5951
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 2:41 am
Call Me: Ben

Re: Climate Change

Mon May 08, 2017 6:31 pm

The fact that a Rothschild banker, bildeberg member, insider puppet is pushing climate change right out of the gate like this makes me even more skeptical about it. Although in fairness if there has been a massive climate change I suppose his wife has been around long enough to witness it.
"Make America Great Again!"

RedSte
Reserve Team Coach
Reserve Team Coach
Posts: 9123
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2007 2:40 am
Call Me: Ste

Re: Climate Change

Mon May 08, 2017 8:56 pm

Ouch... catty :P
My old man said be a City fan...

Nothing significant and lasting will ever come of FFP! - RedSte (2012)

User avatar
marcus leong
Referee
Referee
Posts: 6021
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 6:31 am

Re: RE: Re: Climate Change

Tue May 09, 2017 1:41 am


Relly wrote:The fact that a Rothschild banker, bildeberg member, insider puppet is pushing climate change right out of the gate like this makes me even more skeptical about it. Although in fairness if there has been a massive climate change I suppose his wife has been around long enough to witness it.
This instead of evidence? I have listened to multiple climate deniers arguments and I haven't see a convincing one.

I wonder what do you think is their purpose pursuing this conspiracy? What would they gain?
Rick: "Weddings are basically funerals with cake."

User avatar
Relly
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 5951
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 2:41 am
Call Me: Ben

Re: RE: Re: Climate Change

Tue May 09, 2017 7:02 am

marcus leong wrote:
Tue May 09, 2017 1:41 am
Relly wrote:The fact that a Rothschild banker, bildeberg member, insider puppet is pushing climate change right out of the gate like this makes me even more skeptical about it. Although in fairness if there has been a massive climate change I suppose his wife has been around long enough to witness it.
This instead of evidence? I have listened to multiple climate deniers arguments and I haven't see a convincing one.

I wonder what do you think is their purpose pursuing this conspiracy? What would they gain?
Money.
"Make America Great Again!"

User avatar
marcus leong
Referee
Referee
Posts: 6021
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 6:31 am

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Climate Change

Tue May 09, 2017 7:11 am

Relly wrote:
marcus leong wrote:
Tue May 09, 2017 1:41 am
Relly wrote:The fact that a Rothschild banker, bildeberg member, insider puppet is pushing climate change right out of the gate like this makes me even more skeptical about it. Although in fairness if there has been a massive climate change I suppose his wife has been around long enough to witness it.
This instead of evidence? I have listened to multiple climate deniers arguments and I haven't see a convincing one.

I wonder what do you think is their purpose pursuing this conspiracy? What would they gain?
Money.
How?
Rick: "Weddings are basically funerals with cake."

User avatar
JonSnow
Academy Player
Academy Player
Posts: 167
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 3:11 am

Re: Climate Change

Tue May 09, 2017 10:15 am

marcus leong wrote:
Mon Apr 03, 2017 9:35 am
I found it bizarre that somehow politicians is not fluent in any other science except the science of climate change.

IMO, some of the politicians just use the topic of climate change to rack up votes :( :( (N) (N)

User avatar
ArizonaRed
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 5620
Joined: Sun May 26, 2013 1:12 pm
Call Me: Barry

Re: Climate Change

Tue May 09, 2017 12:55 pm

JonSnow wrote:
Tue May 09, 2017 10:15 am
IMO, some of the politicians just use the topic of climate change to rack up votes :( :( (N) (N)
That argument works both ways, politicians will support or oppose any topic that will get them votes.
I can't believe it. I can't believe it. Football. Bloody hell.

User avatar
Relly
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 5951
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 2:41 am
Call Me: Ben

Re: Climate Change

Wed May 10, 2017 12:00 am

ArizonaRed wrote:
Tue May 09, 2017 12:55 pm
JonSnow wrote:
Tue May 09, 2017 10:15 am
IMO, some of the politicians just use the topic of climate change to rack up votes :( :( (N) (N)
That argument works both ways, politicians will support or oppose any topic that will get them votes.
Except supporting climate change has been sold as the morally correct only answer while questioning climate change gets you labelled a crazy right wing conspiracy theorist. So no, I don't agree that it goes both ways.

Although again, IMO it is mostly about money. I know in my province of Ontario we switch to a green energy plan, where extremely clean operating coal plants were closed, places that employed thousands of skilled workers, in favour of green energy. Meanwhile Ontario signs a huge deal with Samsung to build all our windmills (massive multinational corporation) who then gets richer. While I work at a nuclear power plant supplying half of my provinces power, we get paid 5 cents per kilowatt hour, meanwhile all the natural gas plants, solar fields, and windmills get paid anywhere from 15 to 45 cents. All that is going to large American companies, vs the provincially owned producers that it used to be.
"Make America Great Again!"

User avatar
ArizonaRed
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 5620
Joined: Sun May 26, 2013 1:12 pm
Call Me: Barry

Re: Climate Change

Wed May 10, 2017 12:34 am

Relly wrote:
Wed May 10, 2017 12:00 am
ArizonaRed wrote:
Tue May 09, 2017 12:55 pm
JonSnow wrote:
Tue May 09, 2017 10:15 am
IMO, some of the politicians just use the topic of climate change to rack up votes :( :( (N) (N)
That argument works both ways, politicians will support or oppose any topic that will get them votes.
Except supporting climate change has been sold as the morally correct only answer while questioning climate change gets you labelled a crazy right wing conspiracy theorist. So no, I don't agree that it goes both ways.
n
Although again, IMO it is mostly about money. I know in my province of Ontario we switch to a green energy plan, where extremely clean operating coal plants were closed, places that employed thousands of skilled workers, in favour of green energy. Meanwhile Ontario signs a huge deal with Samsung to build all our windmills (massive multinational corporation) who then gets richer. While I work at a nuclear power plant supplying half of my provinces power, we get paid 5 cents per kilowatt hour, meanwhile all the natural gas plants, solar fields, and windmills get paid anywhere from 15 to 45 cents. All that is going to large American companies, vs the provincially owned producers that it used to be.
Supporting climate change has been sold as my things including being labeled as a tree hugging, bleeding heart green liberal. Unfortunately that the way politics works; if you do not think like I do then you are; wrong, the enemy and evil. I believe that all industries need to be self sufficient, that is they need to be profitable without subsidies or price guarantees or tax breaks or bailouts. It may require that government (at any level) may need to be involved in getting an industry started but once it is turned over (sold) to a private corporation then get out of the way and let the market determine the price.
I can't believe it. I can't believe it. Football. Bloody hell.

User avatar
marcus leong
Referee
Referee
Posts: 6021
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 6:31 am

Re: RE: Re: Climate Change

Wed May 10, 2017 2:29 am

Relly wrote:
ArizonaRed wrote:
Tue May 09, 2017 12:55 pm
JonSnow wrote:
Tue May 09, 2017 10:15 am
IMO, some of the politicians just use the topic of climate change to rack up votes :( :( (N) (N)
That argument works both ways, politicians will support or oppose any topic that will get them votes.
Except supporting climate change has been sold as the morally correct only answer while questioning climate change gets you labelled a crazy right wing conspiracy theorist. So no, I don't agree that it goes both ways.

Although again, IMO it is mostly about money. I know in my province of Ontario we switch to a green energy plan, where extremely clean operating coal plants were closed, places that employed thousands of skilled workers, in favour of green energy. Meanwhile Ontario signs a huge deal with Samsung to build all our windmills (massive multinational corporation) who then gets richer. While I work at a nuclear power plant supplying half of my provinces power, we get paid 5 cents per kilowatt hour, meanwhile all the natural gas plants, solar fields, and windmills get paid anywhere from 15 to 45 cents. All that is going to large American companies, vs the provincially owned producers that it used to be.
As I say, what is your evidence that it isn't true? I haven't see anything credible yet. That's the thing about sciece.

As for money, there are a lot of money in fossil fuel industry. Is that a conspiracy too?
Rick: "Weddings are basically funerals with cake."

User avatar
Relly
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 5951
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 2:41 am
Call Me: Ben

Re: Climate Change

Wed May 10, 2017 4:54 am

"Make America Great Again!"

User avatar
marcus leong
Referee
Referee
Posts: 6021
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 6:31 am

Re: Climate Change

Fri May 19, 2017 8:44 pm

https://apnews.com/3fc5d49a349344f1967a ... n-defended
WASHINGTON (AP) — Another round of bickering is boiling over about temperature readings used in a 2015 study to show how the planet is warming.

The issue is about how readings gathered decades ago were adjusted to try to get a clearer picture of how the Earth’s temperature is changing now. Those adjustments have been questioned by some who reject mainstream climate science and have tried to claim there has been a pause in global warming.

A January study in a scientific journal used another set of measurements to confirm the readings and prove again that the earth’s temperature is rising quickly and that the warming has not paused.

But a congressional committee on Tuesday seized on complaints from a retired scientist from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration about how the original data were handled to claim the data were falsified — even though the retired NOAA scientist they cite does not argue that it was.

What is being touted as a scientific scandal is more about data handling than what rising temperatures show, according to phone and email interviews with more than two dozen experts on the issue, including the former government scientist, whose blogging Saturday reignited a debate.

The hubbub was sparked when retired NOAA data scientist John Bates claimed in a blog post that his boss, then-director of the National Centers for Environmental Information Thomas Karl, “constantly had his ‘thumb on the scale’ — in the documentation, scientific choices and release of datasets — in an effort to discredit the notion of a global warming hiatus” and rushed a study published in the journal Science before international climate negotiations.

Bates said in an interview Monday with The Associated Press that he was most concerned about the way data was handled, documented and stored, raising issues of transparency and availability. He said Karl didn’t follow the more than 20 crucial data storage and handling steps that Bates created for NOAA. He said it looked like the June 2015 study was pushed out to influence the December 2015 climate treaty negotiations in Paris.

However Bates, who acknowledges that Earth is warming from man-made carbon dioxide emissions, said in the interview that there was “no data tampering, no data changing, nothing malicious.”


“It’s really a story of not disclosing what you did,” Bates said in the interview. “It’s not trumped up data in any way shape or form.”

Still, after Bates’ blog post, the House Science Committee , a British tabloid newspaper and others who reject mainstream climate science accused NOAA of playing “fast and loose” with land and water temperature data.

House Science Committee Chairman Lamar Smith, R-Texas, speaking at a hearing Tuesday, called on Science to retract the 2015 study and blasted NOAA for not being cooperative with his subpoenas. When the journal’s publisher Rush Holt, a physicist and former Democratic congressman, said the charges don’t support a retraction because the issue is more about data procedures than science, Smith, an attorney, interrupted him and insisted: “They falsified global warming data.”

The Karl study looked mostly at ocean temperature records several decades old and determined that those older readings skewed too warm when compared to modern monitoring from buoys and other devices because they were taken in ships’ engine rooms. He adjusted those old readings down, which makes it clearer that the earth’s temperature is rising now.

Since then, a new independent study from the University of California, Berkeley looked at the same issue in a different way, and confirmed the Karl calculations. http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/ ... 01207.full

“Not using their data we get the exact same results, both for the ocean record and for the land,” said Zeke Hausfather, lead author of the Berkeley study. He called Bates’ claims “all about procedural disagreements within NOAA that have very little bearing about our understanding about what’s happening to Earth’s climate.”

Marcia McNutt, who was editor of Science at the time the paper was published and is now president of the National Academy of Sciences, praised Bates for wanting to highlight the importance of data archiving, but said his criticisms have little to do with the main part of the paper and chastised the House for using issues of data archiving to try to discredit the 2015 study.

“The study has been reproduced independently of Karl et al — that’s the ultimate platinum test of whether a study is to be believed or not,” McNutt said. “And this study has passed.”

The Associated Press interviewed more than two dozen experts by phone or email. Most agreed with Karl or didn’t take a side but said it didn’t matter because global warming continues regardless of this latest kerfuffle. Two supported Bates, saying there were serious scientific integrity concerns.

As far as the study being rushed, the journal says its records show otherwise. Science’s new editor-in-chief Jeremy Berg said it usually takes 109 days between a paper’s submission and its publication. The Karl study was received by the journal on Dec. 23, 2014 and published 185 days later, on June 26, 2015.

“The paper was not rushed in any way,” McNutt said. “It had an exceptional number of reviewers, many more than average because we knew it was on a controversial topic. It had a lot of data analysis.”




Rick: "Weddings are basically funerals with cake."

Return to “Members Lounge”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users