Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

Climate Skeptics on Kevin Myres Last night

  • 29-07-2010 05:32PM
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,031 ✭✭✭


    Anyone see the climate skeptics on Kevin Myres last night?
    It wasn't a bad debate. I'd wonder what motivates the skeptics, they didn't come across as people bribed by BP and Shell.


«13456

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,556 ✭✭✭Nolanger


    They're just honest people who can think for themselves. Maybe they're fed up with all the one-sided greenhouse effect, ozone hole, global warming, climate change warnings?


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 6,391 Mod ✭✭✭✭Macha


    Nolanger wrote: »
    They're just honest people who can think for themselves. Maybe they're fed up with all the one-sided greenhouse effect, ozone hole, global warming, climate change warnings?
    Yes, don't you just hate scientific consensus?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,729 ✭✭✭Heroditas


    taconnol wrote: »
    Yes, don't you just hate it scientific consensus?


    There is vastly varying consensus among the community regarding the supposed effects of climate change. That in itself causes a huge amount of scepticism.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 6,391 Mod ✭✭✭✭Macha


    Heroditas wrote: »
    There is vastly varying consensus among the community regarding the supposed effects of climate change. That in itself causes a huge amount of scepticism.
    Of course there is doubt about the exact effects of climate change - it is an unprecedented global change. But there is consensus on the causes.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,485 ✭✭✭Denerick


    Kevin Myers is not one to admire. I follow that mantra with great enthusiasm.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,729 ✭✭✭Heroditas


    taconnol wrote: »
    Of course there is doubt about the exact effects of climate change - it is an unprecedented global change. But there is consensus on the causes.


    To make important data-driven decisions though; decisions that will impinge on the lifestyle of millions and millions of people; one needs to accurately predict the effects and have some sort of consensus.

    In my opinion anyway.
    But I'm an engineer and that's how our brains work! :p


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,092 ✭✭✭catbear


    This thread will probably go on for ages but "Climate skeptics" as a title doesn't make sense. Climates change and have done for millennia but what is not certain is the science around the measurement of the anthropomorphic influence.

    Perhaps the title should read "Climate Change Consensus Skeptics".

    I still remember the drip drip feeding of Climate change stories in the eighties about how the next ice age was only around the corner.

    Anyway Fianna Fail will be happy if it distracts anyone while they continue robbing the nation, I can attest to their influence having an effect upon my financial well being. That is not speculation but fact!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,729 ✭✭✭Heroditas


    Can we get it moved to where it belongs? i.e. the Sustainability and Environmental Issues forum?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,485 ✭✭✭Denerick


    Heroditas wrote: »
    To make important data-driven decisions though; decisions that will impinge on the lifestyle of millions and millions of people; one needs to accurately predict the effects and have some sort of consensus.

    In my opinion anyway.
    But I'm an engineer and that's how our brains work! :p

    Maybe. But...

    If there is a 20% chance that climate change will result in massive floodings, and fundamental changes to the distribution of rainwater and agricultural land across the globe, causing massive misery for billions, perhaps it would not be a bad idea to look at reducing carbon emmissions across the board?

    Whats more, reducing carbon emmissions is good anyway as fossil fuels are finite, carbon emmissions damage both our environment (Take for example coal mining in West Virginia, which has devastated the appalachian environment and scenery) and our health (Bronchitis)

    In short, whats to lose? Even if we're wrong and climate change is a hoax, we'll benefit from cleaner and domestic sources of energy. Our physical environment and health will improve. If we're right... Well... We've just saved civilisation.

    I really don't understand the sketpics lethargy.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,729 ✭✭✭Heroditas


    Denerick wrote: »
    Maybe. But...

    If there is a 20% chance that climate change will result in massive floodings, and fundamental changes to the distribution of rainwater and agricultural land across the globe, causing massive misery for billions, perhaps it would not be a bad idea to look at reducing carbon emmissions across the board?

    I'd need more than a 20% argument to persuade me.
    However, what gets me is the varying in the consequences - some say sea levels will rise a few inches, others would have us believe it's a few metres.


    Denerick wrote: »
    Whats more, reducing carbon emmissions is good anyway as fossil fuels are finite, carbon emmissions damage both our environment (Take for example coal mining in West Virginia, which has devastated the appalachian environment and scenery) and our health (Bronchitis)


    Sulphur and other elements in compounds damage the environment, e.g. Sulphur dioxide. Carbon is not dangerous! Every living creature on this planet consists of carbon.
    I do agree with the effect on the scenery though

    Denerick wrote: »
    In short, whats to lose?

    Lots of money for a potential reduction in living standards

    Denerick wrote: »
    we'll benefit from cleaner and domestic sources of energy.

    True. However, there are drawbacks to even this "clean" energy. Scenery is being torn up to obtain the precious metals used for a lot of renewable generating equipment.

    Denerick wrote: »
    I really don't understand the sketpics lethargy.

    The problem is when one sees people like Al Gore as a climate change spokesman.
    It's a bit like being convinced that trade unions are looking after the industrial worker when you have the likes of Begg and O'Connor on massive wages and sitting on boards of directors. The real message gets lost.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 6,391 Mod ✭✭✭✭Macha


    Heroditas wrote: »
    Can we get it moved to where it belongs? i.e. the Sustainability and Environmental Issues forum?
    Meh, there's already an open thread on this - there's always one person or the other who thinks they can prove that anthropogenic climate change isn't true. It would just get locked/merged.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭RichardAnd


    taconnol wrote: »
    Of course there is doubt about the exact effects of climate change - it is an unprecedented global change. But there is consensus on the causes.


    Climate change happens on earth ever few centuries. It happened before we were here and it will happen after we are gone. Go back 600 years and you'd find yourself in the Medieval Warm Period. This, in turn, led to the little ice age 300 or so years later. There were no cars back then yet this happened.

    Climate change is real, whether (good opportunity for a pun there :D ) or not it is being cause by humans is unknown. Scientists are not united on Global Warming at all and several years ago, thousands of them signed a statement to refute it. Someone might know what it's called, I can't seem to find it.

    What is certain, at least to me, is that Climate Change is being used by governments in an effort to get more tax out of people. I'm all for Green Energy and if I ever build a house, I will fill it full of solar panels and wind mills.

    This reminds me of tax on cigarettes. They get taxed and the government and anti-smoking nazis will claim it's simply to discourage people from smoking. This is, of course, absurd because if they really didn't want people smoking, they would raise the cost of a box of fags to 100 euro. Instead, it's high enough to make money but low enough to be affordable. It's the same thing with Petrol though it is true that the Green Rangers of this world would love to see us paying 5 euro a litre for fuel.

    So to anyone who blindly believes in Climate Change propaganda I advise them to do a little reading from other sources and not rely on the 6:01 news to paint reality for them.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,729 ✭✭✭Heroditas


    taconnol wrote: »
    Meh, there's already an open thread on this - there's always one person or the other who thinks they can prove that anthropogenic climate change isn't true. It would just get locked/merged.


    Can we get it moved to the Sustainability and Environmental Issues Forum? :D


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 6,391 Mod ✭✭✭✭Macha


    Heroditas wrote: »
    To make important data-driven decisions though; decisions that will impinge on the lifestyle of millions and millions of people; one needs to accurately predict the effects and have some sort of consensus.

    In my opinion anyway.
    But I'm an engineer and that's how our brains work! :p
    They have been as accurately predicted as possible. We're not talking about a maths theorum here so if you're looking for 100% certainty, I assume you also are skeptical about the theory of gravity?

    For those who are interested:

    http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/syr/en/spms3.html


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,729 ✭✭✭Heroditas


    taconnol wrote: »
    They have been as accurately predicted as possible.

    Like glaciers disappearing within the next 20-25 years?


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 6,391 Mod ✭✭✭✭Macha


    Heroditas wrote: »
    Like glaciers disappearing within the next 20-25 years?
    *sigh* this has been discussed ad nauseum:

    http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055746390


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,729 ✭✭✭Heroditas


    Anyway, seeing that we're in the Irish Economy section of Boards, I'll say one thing.
    Whether I believe in climate change or not, it's all good as far as I'm concerned.
    I'm going to be very busy for many years to come in my career due to the various legislations and initiatives being brought in.
    So, eh, thank you to all the greenies out there. It's certainly helping my own personal economy and I'm going to do very well out of it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,412 ✭✭✭Road-Hog


    Heroditas wrote: »
    Anyway, seeing that we're in the Irish Economy section of Boards, I'll say one thing.
    Whether I believe in climate change or not, it's all good as far as I'm concerned.
    I'm going to be very busy for many years to come in my career due to the various legislations and initiatives being brought in.
    So, eh, thank you to all the greenies out there. It's certainly helping my own personal economy and I'm going to do very well out of it.

    you are the smug one aren't you.......


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,316 ✭✭✭amacca


    Heroditas wrote: »
    Anyway, seeing that we're in the Irish Economy section of Boards, I'll say one thing.
    Whether I believe in climate change or not, it's all good as far as I'm concerned.
    I'm going to be very busy for many years to come in my career due to the various legislations and initiatives being brought in.
    So, eh, thank you to all the greenies out there. It's certainly helping my own personal economy and I'm going to do very well out of it.

    would now be a good time to bring up my utter loathing of the green party in general and spineless gormless and clown face ryan in particular?

    ask a stupid question I suppose, nevertheless....

    I wish the whole consensus was found to be nonsense, if for no other reason than the return of the "greenies" to their rightful eco friendly biodegradable habitats could be expedited.

    corduroy wearing, bicycle riding nitwits.....


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,619 ✭✭✭fontanalis


    Didn't Myers fall for that idiotic Turks creationist book? I also remember reading one of his articles where he was talking about birds finding their way north when migrating or something like that. the last sentence was; explain that scientists. Very childish so I'd take any science coverage of his with his chip sized pinch of salt.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,849 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout


    Heroditas wrote: »
    Anyway, seeing that we're in the Irish Economy section of Boards, I'll say one thing.
    Whether I believe in climate change or not, it's all good as far as I'm concerned.
    I'm going to be very busy for many years to come in my career due to the various legislations and initiatives being brought in.
    So, eh, thank you to all the greenies out there. It's certainly helping my own personal economy and I'm going to do very well out of it.

    wow, what a dickhead


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Heroditas wrote: »
    So, eh, thank you to all the greenies out there.
    amacca wrote: »
    I wish the whole consensus was found to be nonsense, if for no other reason than the return of the "greenies" to their rightful eco friendly biodegradable habitats could be expedited.
    Funny how, when science tells us something we want to hear, or delivers something that improves our lives, those responsible are recognised for their contribution to humanity and often become household names, e.g. Alexander Fleming, Marie Curie, Louis Pasteur.

    But when science tells us that we may need to change our behaviour, those responsible, employing the same scientific method as those mentioned above, are lumped in with lunatic fringe groups, such as “the greenies”.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,853 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    djpbarry wrote: »
    Funny how, when science tells us something we want to hear, or delivers something that improves our lives, those responsible are recognised for their contribution to humanity and often become household names, e.g. Alexander Fleming, Marie Curie, Louis Pasteur.

    But when science tells us that we may need to change our behaviour, those responsible, employing the same scientific method as those mentioned above, are lumped in with lunatic fringe groups, such as “the greenies”.

    you are slightly misrepresting this. A comparable situation would be "science" telling us that a large Asteroid will hit the earth in 50 years time, head in the sand would not be a good strategy.

    Here we are dealing with models, assumptions and a green lobby that are not unbiased. Given that this is an economy forum , I dont think the irony will be lost on anyone that another science, economics which has wait for it, models, assumptions and a government that is not unbiased is currently wrecking the global economy.

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,038 ✭✭✭sponsoredwalk


    Global warming/climate change has no parallel to talking about a comet coming towars earth other than the possibility of species extinction.

    With a comet/asteroid we have a very real chance of deflecting/destroying it & knowing extremely accurately how things will pan out years and years in advance.

    Example 1

    Example 2

    etc...

    With global warming there is no clear view of the future, no clear view of the present & a barely visible picture of the past.
    The amount of variables here is staggering, the definitive cause is up for debate even though there is plenty evidence that it is occuring.

    The charicatured view is that of the loony left, or liberal greenies trying to impose some sort of morality on the world
    by getting people to cut down on destroying mother earth.
    This is pitched against the rich fatcat's trying to continue to cut costs & stress by freely polluting away.

    The more accurate view is that of human beings from all walks of life completely nonplussed about our environment & our effect on it.
    So much evidence points to the ravaging of our environment, be it ice melting, species extinctions etc...
    & we don't know whether it's all of the megatons of pollutants we put into the atmosphere or whether it's just natural & to what extent each contributes...
    This is pitched against the rich fatcat's trying to continue to cut costs & stress by freely polluting away.

    :rolleyes:

    I think the question people should be asking themselves is, even if we contribute @ a 5% rate to the denigration of the earth
    & bring the annihalation of the human species closer that small 5% faster, is that something we want to approve of...?


    Whatever model we choose to enact has the potential to destroy the entire human species &,
    unlike economics models, there exists an independent truth about the current situation.
    There either will be the end of humanity or wont be the end of humanity,
    and our current policies could be the deciding factor in this question.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,361 ✭✭✭Boskowski


    I think whatever way we look at particular symptoms and the exact cause and effect I think there can be very little doubt that the human race is acting irresponsibly with the planet and all it's lifeforms and it's a no-brainer that if we continue on the route we've chosen as a species we will destroy the very foundations of our existence and that of countless species that are unfortunate enough having to share this planet with us.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    silverharp wrote: »
    Here we are dealing with models, assumptions and a green lobby that are not unbiased.
    Models are what virtually all physical science is based upon. As for the green lobby, unless they're producing peer-reviewed literature on the subject, they're largely irrelevant.
    With global warming there is no clear view of the future, no clear view of the present & a barely visible picture of the past.
    No clear view of the present? We have thermometers, don't we? In fact, we've had reasonably accurate thermometers for about 150 years.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,038 ✭✭✭sponsoredwalk


    djpbarry wrote: »
    No clear view of the present? We have thermometers, don't we? In fact, we've had reasonably accurate thermometers for about 150 years.

    Luckily science is based on more than a thermometer reading ;)

    My point is that for skeptics to just throw away the credible - evidence of global warming because of huckster practices by some climate scientists is a bad idea.

    Personally I don't know enough of the science behind any of this so I refuse to make a definitive judgement & have decided to leave it to "the experts", for now.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,038 ✭✭✭sponsoredwalk


    Climate-Change-Infographic.jpg

    link (with links to original studies).

    edit: counter-arguments (read the comments sections too! :p)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,853 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    djpbarry wrote: »
    Models are what virtually all physical science is based upon. As for the green lobby, unless they're producing peer-reviewed literature on the subject, they're largely irrelevant.
    No clear view of the present? We have thermometers, don't we? In fact, we've had reasonably accurate thermometers for about 150 years.

    But unless the final book has been written on all the interaction of climate variables, then I'm wary of the green lobby running with this on the political side.
    And to be honest there are plenty of enviomental issues that affect the quality of life of people on this Island without getting tied into carbon credits and all the other hysterical proposals which in most likelyhood will have little to 0 mitigating effects on the climate even if the planet does warm over the next century.

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 6,391 Mod ✭✭✭✭Macha


    silverharp wrote: »
    But unless the final book has been written on all the interaction of climate variables, then I'm wary of the green lobby running with this on the political side.
    What exactly does that mean? Show me any modern democratic government that denies the reality of anthropogenic climate change. And if we were to wait until we knew everything there is to know about an issue before we act, we would still be sitting around in caves banging rocks together.
    silverharp wrote: »
    And to be honest there are plenty of enviomental issues that affect the quality of life of people on this Island without getting tied into carbon credits and all the other hysterical proposals which in most likelyhood will have little to 0 mitigating effects on the climate even if the planet does warm over the next century.
    Please explain why carbon credits are "hysterical" and why they will have no impact. Of course there are other environmental issues that are important but climate change is a biggie and the idea that we are incapable of multi-tasking in our efforts is crazy.( I really wish I would never have to hear the phrase again "shur there are more important things for us to be worrying about".


Advertisement