Tell me how wrote: » 3 words for you. Rate. Of. Change. It is demonstrably proven human behaviours are affecting the planet at a rate beyond any natural event other than something exceptional.
Rockbeast2 wrote: » Rate. Of. Change. compared to? Younger Dryas Period? Things change. *Not at you* It is actually such a sign of humankinds' egotism, and current self-centrism that there are people that believe their behaviour actually changes the fate of the planet.
moonage wrote: » The temperature has gone up 1 degree since the industrial revolution. Really scary! If it was the extra CO2 from burning fossil fuels that caused this then any further increases in CO2 emissions won't have much of an effect because it is not a linear relationship, but rather a logarithmic one.
Rockbeast2 wrote: » "There’s no way that adding a greenhouse gas to the atmosphere can’t but increase the temperature. " ?? 2 is a greater number than 1 is what you have just stated.
Tell me how wrote: » Why? You want me to leave the conversation to just one side?
JJayoo wrote: » This is the problem, you have decided that there are two sides, and anyone who isn't 100% on your side has to be 100% wrong, I mean a few posts ago you were complaining about a throw away comment I made about fencing posts, questioning me on forestry just for the sake of replying. You had zero knowledge about the topic yet had to question everything I said since supposedly I am 100% wrong because I'm not 100% on your side. Even my last post in which I said I would rather hear from people with a scientific pedigree you had to reply critizing it for some reason even tho I thought you were all for science. And it isn't just you it's how all these discussions go, people become tribal, my side Vs your side, for me to be right you have to be wrong.
Pa ElGrande wrote: » Where is this seen in nature, where and how is it measured? How is the link established between the observations measured and specific human activity?
Rockbeast2 wrote: » I honestly believed you were genuine for for a while, Tell Me Now... I am here TO REPEAT THE MESSAGE that we need to act, to support the idea that Greta is doing something worthwhile and to reiterate the idea that WE MUST LISTEN TO THE SCIENTISTS. * That worked out well for Germany and the rest of the world in 30s/40s.
Tell me how wrote: » Seriously, are you suggesting you doubt this? Have you tried a single google search by which to investigate this?
Tell me how wrote: » ... The events where she speaks are not workshops or academic conferences, both places where the scientists are active. She has raised awareness. Very successfully. She is a figurehead of the movement and it is not at all uncommon for such people to speak in that way. Ellen McArthur does it in a similar fashion in relation to the circular economy.
Rockbeast2 wrote: » "People in general tire of repetitive holier than thou slogan chanters very quickly. Even the Nazis jazzed it up a little and didn't just repeat - "listen to the scientists, we must kill the Jews" ... they had science (eugenics) backing their theories too." *Not disparaging Tell Me How in any way. As Daddy Rockbeast once said: "You can always pay a scientist to agree with you." There's a bang of cult off greta & her super-friends.
Jimmy Garlic wrote: » People in general tire of repetitive holier than thou slogan chanters very quickly. Even the Nazis jazzed it up a little and didn't just repeat - "listen to the scientists, we must kill the Jews" ... they had science (eugenics) backing their theories too.
Tell me how wrote: » Zero knowledge? About a throwaway comment? I actually worked out using your logic that we'd need over 1M KMs of fencing posts to get to to the few hundred M you spoke about. And that was only using 200M as your proposed number of posts but I said I'd let you off with your plan.
