"Man-made" Climate Change Lunathicks Out in Full Force

Akrasia · 16-01-2019 9:12am

Thargor wrote: »

This is pretty horrifying, nearly total insect collapse even in virgin untouched rainforest far from any pesticides or human interference, seems to be worldwide aswell:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jan/15/insect-collapse-we-are-destroying-our-life-support-systems

It's very very worrying. These ecosystems are usually self regulating and can maintain a stable climate over tens of thousands of years. We're subjecting them to very rapid changes in temperature and rainfall over sustained periods of time, and they cannot cope with this.

The fastest mass extinction event on earth was the Permian Mass extinction event when it took about 60000 years to wipe out 90% of aquatic species and 70% of land species.

Humans have been technological species for only a few thousand years and we're doing our very best to beat that record.

50% of the worlds species live in rainforests and if the insect population collapses, there goes the entire food web.

The other great reservoirs for natural diversity are the coral reefs and we're destroying those too

The Oort Cloud · 17-01-2019 3:24pm

The IPCC, Intergovernmental panel On Climate Change are politicians, none of them are real scientists or climatologists, they are just spouting pseudo-science, and I have no time for pseudo-science. So-called man-made climate change is the biggest scam in the history of the world, just another carbon tax to keep the people down and solidly controlled. If they had thought of taxing the people in the medieval warm period they would have done the same if they were good with coming up with this crazy idea.

The climate has been changing all on its own for millions of years, from the medieval warm period of which was a lot hotter than it is now to ice ages, the natural workings of the climate changes all by itself. There is not one scientist or climatologist on this planet that fully understands chaos theory, and climate is just that... chaos theory. Extremely complex, as well as that big orange ball in space of which has a huge impact on climate as well. When pseudo-science becomes the new science we sure as hell need to worry, real science is eroding, this is what will destroy us all if it keeps up.

NASA has just recently released their years study on the suns sun-spot activity, the sun-spots are basically non-existent at this time. NASA have said that we will be in a cooling period now for the next 12 years, and that comes from NASA itself. Even if we were entering another kind of medieval warm period the governments of the world would still carbon tax you even if it is a natural occurrence from a natural climate change.

The world will be here long after we are all gone. Save the planet they say, there is nothing wrong with the planet, but there is something very wrong with pollution, that needs to be cleaned up, especially the oceans. The climate is fine, and if NASA are correct in their studies, then we are in a cooling period now. They would tax the volcanoes if they could. This world has and will always change from natural climate change, and interfering with something they know little about could be more dangerous for us all. Why are people afraid of the earths natural changes ? Humans have always adapted and over-come these changes, why be afraid of these natural changes ?

Unless you can fully understand chaos theory, you will never understand natural climate function. Same goes for the Sun.

Woke Hogan · 17-01-2019 3:31pm

The Oort Cloud wrote: »

The IPCC, Intergovernmental panel On Climate Change are politicians, none of them are real scientists or climatologists, they are just spouting pseudo-science, and I have no time for pseudo-science. So-called man-made climate change is the biggest scam in the history of the world, just another carbon tax to keep the people down and solidly controlled. If they had thought of taxing the people in the medieval warm period they would have done the same if they were good with coming up with this crazy idea.

The climate has been changing all on its own for millions of years, from the medieval warm period of which was a lot hotter than it is now to ice ages, the natural workings of the climate changes all by itself. There is not one scientist or climatologist on this planet that fully understands chaos theory, and climate is just that... chaos theory. Extremely complex, as well as that big orange ball in space of which has a huge impact on climate as well. When pseudo-science becomes the new science we sure as hell need to worry, real science is eroding, this is what will destroy us all if it keeps up.

NASA has just recently released their years study on the suns sun-spot activity, the sun-spots are basically non-existent at this time. NASA have said that we will be in a cooling period now for the next 12 years, and that comes from NASA itself. Even if we were entering another kind of medieval warm period the governments of the world would still carbon tax you even if it is a natural occurrence from a natural climate change.

The world will be here long after we are all gone. Save the planet they say, there is nothing wrong with the planet, but there is something very wrong with pollution, that needs to be cleaned up, especially the oceans. The climate is fine, and if NASA are correct in their studies, then we are in a cooling period now. They would tax the volcanoes if they could. This world has and will always change from natural climate change, and interfering with something they know little about could be more dangerous for us all. Why are people afraid of the earths natural changes ? Humans have always adapted and over-come these changes, why be afraid of these natural changes ?

Unless you can fully understand chaos theory, you will never understand natural climate function. Same goes for the Sun.

What a load of complete ****e.

xckjoo · 17-01-2019 3:51pm

Someone just learnt the term "chaos theory".

The Oort Cloud · 17-01-2019 3:57pm

If that is all you can come up with, then you obviously haven't a clue.

http://www.ipsnews.net/2018/11/extreme-weather-not-proof-global-warming-nasa-global-cooling/

Crisis of credibility
I turn next to my latest find in my continuing research on the UN doomsday scare and the global warming debate. I refer to an article published on April 24, 2018 in Real Clear Markets and Investors Business Daily titled: “Did You Know the Greatest Two-Year Global Cooling Event Just Took Place?” by Aaron Brown.
Brown reports that NASA data show that global temperatures dropped sharply over the past two years. Does this make NASA a global warming denier?
Brown looked at the official NASA global temperature data and noticed something surprising. From February 2016 to February 2018, “global average temperatures dropped by 0.56 degrees Celsius.” That, he notes, is the biggest two-year drop in the past century.
“The 2016-2018 Big Chill,” he writes, “was composed of two Little Chills, the biggest five-month drop ever (February to June 2016) and the fourth biggest (February to June 2017). A similar event from February to June 2018 would bring global average temperatures below the 1980s average.”
Brown’s discovery did not warrant any news coverage in US mainstream media.

xckjoo · 17-01-2019 4:04pm

Life is too short to spend it in the lunatic asylum trying to strike up a rational conversation

Akrasia · 17-01-2019 5:02pm

The Oort Cloud wrote: »

If that is all you can come up with, then you obviously haven't a clue.

http://www.ipsnews.net/2018/11/extreme-weather-not-proof-global-warming-nasa-global-cooling/

Crisis of credibility
I turn next to my latest find in my continuing research on the UN doomsday scare and the global warming debate. I refer to an article published on April 24, 2018 in Real Clear Markets and Investors Business Daily titled: “Did You Know the Greatest Two-Year Global Cooling Event Just Took Place?” by Aaron Brown.
Brown reports that NASA data show that global temperatures dropped sharply over the past two years. Does this make NASA a global warming denier?
Brown looked at the official NASA global temperature data and noticed something surprising. From February 2016 to February 2018, “global average temperatures dropped by 0.56 degrees Celsius.” That, he notes, is the biggest two-year drop in the past century.
“The 2016-2018 Big Chill,” he writes, “was composed of two Little Chills, the biggest five-month drop ever (February to June 2016) and the fourth biggest (February to June 2017). A similar event from February to June 2018 would bring global average temperatures below the 1980s average.”
Brown’s discovery did not warrant any news coverage in US mainstream media.

It is fascinating. Absolutely fascinating, Thanks for posting this. It really makes me wonder how anyone could anyone could be so ignorant and ill informed that they actually think this is in any way a convincing argument against global warming or in favour of 'global cooling'

https://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2018/04/24/did_you_know_the_greatest_two-year_global_cooling_event_just_took_place_103243.html

It's utterly insane that anyone thinks this is a good argument.

A 'big chill' made up of 'two little chills' yet these 'chills' were all within a period where the past 4 years are all the hottest 4 years since temperature records began.

Must be global cooling. Definitely. Certainly not blatant manipulation of statistics and cherrypicking and fabrication of Data, no siree

Where's me jumper?

Woke Hogan · 17-01-2019 5:35pm

Climate change deniers who think it’s all a scam to generate tax revenue remind me of those scumbags who think the same of the NCT. They’d rather mow down a family crossing the road than pay a penny to maintain their rusty old ****box of a car. They think they can also penny pinch their way out of a societal Holocaust. They’ll see when the effects of climate change really kick in.

The Oort Cloud · 17-01-2019 6:20pm

Woke Hogan wrote: »

Climate change deniers who think it’s all a scam to generate tax revenue remind me of those scumbags who think the same of the NCT. They’d rather mow down a family crossing the road than pay a penny to maintain their rusty old ****box of a car. They think they can also penny pinch their way out of a societal Holocaust. They’ll see when the effects of climate change really kick in.

No-where in my post did I say I was a climate denier.

Heartland Institute Science Director Jay Lehr at the AM 560 Freedom Summit in suburban Chicago on October 29, 2016. Lehr's thesis: There is not now, nor has there ever been, any scientific evidence proving mankind has affected the climate on a global scale. Our media and “scientific community” tell us otherwise. But here’s the truth: The hypothesis of man-caused global warming is based almost entirely on computer modeling that are, quite simply, a bad scientific joke. However, that has not stopped politicians from pouring hundreds of millions in taxpayer-funded grants to unethical scientists to keep the scam going. The result is continued impoverishment of the poor, a declining standard of living for the middle class, and greater empowerment of the ruling class.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcRTX71MHu8

Akrasia · 17-01-2019 10:25pm

The Oort Cloud wrote: »

No-where in my post did I say I was a climate denier.

Heartland Institute Science Director Jay Lehr at the AM 560 Freedom Summit in suburban Chicago on October 29, 2016. Lehr's thesis: There is not now, nor has there ever been, any scientific evidence proving mankind has affected the climate on a global scale. Our media and “scientific community” tell us otherwise. But here’s the truth: The hypothesis of man-caused global warming is based almost entirely on computer modeling that are, quite simply, a bad scientific joke. However, that has not stopped politicians from pouring hundreds of millions in taxpayer-funded grants to unethical scientists to keep the scam going. The result is continued impoverishment of the poor, a declining standard of living for the middle class, and greater empowerment of the ruling class.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcRTX71MHu8

He even denies he's a climate change denier while promoting a video denying climate change.

Not the sharpest tool in the box

Woke Hogan · 17-01-2019 10:53pm

The Oort Cloud wrote: »

No-where in my post did I say I was a climate denier.

Heartland Institute Science Director Jay Lehr at the AM 560 Freedom Summit in suburban Chicago on October 29, 2016. Lehr's thesis: There is not now, nor has there ever been, any scientific evidence proving mankind has affected the climate on a global scale. Our media and “scientific community” tell us otherwise. But here’s the truth: The hypothesis of man-caused global warming is based almost entirely on computer modeling that are, quite simply, a bad scientific joke. However, that has not stopped politicians from pouring hundreds of millions in taxpayer-funded grants to unethical scientists to keep the scam going. The result is continued impoverishment of the poor, a declining standard of living for the middle class, and greater empowerment of the ruling class.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcRTX71MHu8

I'm saying you're a climate change denier.

The Oort Cloud · 17-01-2019 11:08pm

Woke Hogan wrote: »

I'm saying you're a climate change denier.

I said this on my previous post... The climate has been changing all on its own for millions of years.

So how can you call me a climate denier when I clearly stated that The climate has been changing all on its own for millions of years ?. You obviously haven't even bothered to read my main post, you're asleep.

17-01-2019 11:18pm

The Oort Cloud wrote: »

I said this on my previous post... The climate has been changing all on its own for millions of years.

So how can you call me a climate denier when I clearly stated that The climate has been changing all on its own for millions of years ?. You obviously haven't even bothered to read my main post, you're asleep.

No one is denying the fact that climate has been changing since the start of climate on this planet, but no the question is "how much is human activity affecting it?"
Then the next question is what to do about it?

This is where I believe the "official" approach is wrong, looking at CO2 emissions is a bit like trying to resolve gun crime by looking at the amount of high velocity lead there is in the air, instead of looking at the guns!

What we should be looking it is the consumerist world we are living in, in particular "planned obsolescence" where stuff is made to fail prematurely so you are forced to buy replacements. The excess manufacturing produces far more CO2 than all the other so called greenhouse gas emitters.

The video below shows a classic example of a product that is life limited to make you replace it frequently.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Brj8-jD2CFY

Akrasia · 18-01-2019 11:50am

I'm not an electrical engineer, not by a long shot. I still have to double check which way to wire a plug, but I think those resisters are there to preserve the lifespan of the LEDs, not to artificially reduce their longevity. The resisters prevent the LEDs from being overloaded by an unstable current.

The video shows that the LEDs will still work without the resistor, but in real world conditions, an unstable current will blow more LEDs than blown resistors. Also, the resistor is engineered to be the point of failure on the LED, like a fuse, so that it is designed to blow before the LEDs fail. LEDs are like semiconductors, they offer almost no resistance, so if there is a power surge, without the resistor, there could be a risk of an electrical fire.

I agree with you about Apple, they are deliberately engineering their product to fail over a couple of years in order to keep their turnover high, but not all electronics are built this way.

Mostly when electronics fail early it's because the manufacturers are cheaping out on components or design. The EU should introduce legislation requiring electronic components sold in the EU to meet minimum design specifications (use an ISO standard to police this) in order to reduce the amount of waste. The ISO standard should include the full lifecycle of the product. Packaging, product operation, and recycling to ensure that we don't have such wasteful consumption.

And while we're at it, food packaging needs to be looked at seriously. Most people shop at supermarkets. There's absolutely no need for almost every single piece of fruit to be wrapped in plastic (including those nets made from plastic)

Phase it out over 5 years. All packaging needs to be compostable by 2024

18-01-2019 3:50pm

Akrasia wrote: »

I'm not an electrical engineer, not by a long shot. I still have to double check which way to wire a plug, but I think those resisters are there to preserve the lifespan of the LEDs, not to artificially reduce their longevity. The resisters prevent the LEDs from being overloaded by an unstable current.

The video shows that the LEDs will still work without the resistor, but in real world conditions, an unstable current will blow more LEDs than blown resistors. Also, the resistor is engineered to be the point of failure on the LED, like a fuse, so that it is designed to blow before the LEDs fail. LEDs are like semiconductors, they offer almost no resistance, so if there is a power surge, without the resistor, there could be a risk of an electrical fire.

As someone who started out in electronics in the 1970s repairing Radios, I know what is going on. Those products are designed to fail prematurily, the main circuit board has the voltage regulator and associated components installed there (look at 2:30 on the video). The extra resister serves no purpose except to fail early!

I know of equipment that has LED indicators from the 1970s that are still going strong, properly designed electronics will last for decades and do not need to be overly expensive either.

Akrasia wrote: »

I agree with you about Apple, they are deliberately engineering their product to fail over a couple of years in order to keep their turnover high, but not all electronics are built this way.

Mostly when electronics fail early it's because the manufacturers are cheaping out on components or design. The EU should introduce legislation requiring electronic components sold in the EU to meet minimum design specifications (use an ISO standard to police this) in order to reduce the amount of waste. The ISO standard should include the full lifecycle of the product. Packaging, product operation, and recycling to ensure that we don't have such wasteful consumption.

And while we're at it, food packaging needs to be looked at seriously. Most people shop at supermarkets. There's absolutely no need for almost every single piece of fruit to be wrapped in plastic (including those nets made from plastic)

Phase it out over 5 years. All packaging needs to be compostable by 2024

I agree that many are cheaping out with componants, but as products are required to carry a warrenty, there is a limit to how cheap they can go, so most go for the second option and that is to design a weak spot such as a poorly placed capacitor that gets heated by some other part of the circuit such that it fails shortly after the warrenty has expired.

The greatest method to reduce the impact of man on the environment would be to eliminate planned obsolesence and force manufacturers to make products that are durable (within reason) and can be expected to live a reasonable lifespan.

With the huge amount of automation we have in the world, we really should not need to work long hours for low pay, we have robots to do most of the hard work, we should all be having a universal basic income of some kind and only required to work 20 hours a week or so to buy the luxuries. There is no point in buying stuff time and time again because it has been killed off by design.

But with our "trickle up economy" and the requirement of infinite growth in a finite world, I feel that future generations will be really screwed and nothing will be done because to ultra rich will never allow that to happen.

The Oort Cloud · 18-01-2019 5:11pm

I agree with the fact you made above in regard to the electronics of today being built to fail. I myself had gone into electronics repair, but in 1980, and those old radios and large home stereo systems were a rock solid build with excellent components of which last many decades.

I still repair vintage radios today. If like you said that if the electronics companies built them to last like they did back in the day, there would be a lot less junk dumped and less need for people to continuously purchase more electrical items just to dump again in less than a year or two.

So for that purpose, it would be a great thing for companies to go back to excellence in electronics build and put an end to the endless dumping of their made-to-fail products. That would help in a big way. The electronics of today are made to fail in a short period of time, and I completely agree with this from my own experience. I still have an old vintage 1970's radio system and all LED's still work perfectly and the radio itself, this one never needed repair.

Akrasia · 18-01-2019 9:14pm

The Oort Cloud wrote: »

I agree with the fact you made above in regard to the electronics of today being built to fail. I myself had gone into electronics repair, but in 1980, and those old radios and large home stereo systems were a rock solid build with excellent components of which last many decades.

I still repair vintage radios today. If like you said that if the electronics companies built them to last like they did back in the day, there would be a lot less junk dumped and less need for people to continuously purchase more electrical items just to dump again in less than a year or two.

So for that purpose, it would be a great thing for companies to go back to excellence in electronics build and put an end to the endless dumping of their made-to-fail products. That would help in a big way. The electronics of today are made to fail in a short period of time, and I completely agree with this from my own experience. I still have an old vintage 1970's radio system and all LED's still work perfectly and the radio itself, this one never needed repair.

Your 1970s radio was also the size of a toaster, probably had one speaker and only picked up am, fm and LW radio

Modern electronics are trying to do an awful lot more than just be a radio.

It is possible to make electronics last decades instead of years and years instead of months, but the pace of technological change means that even if your smartphone could last 20 years, hardly anyone would want to use it because technology has moved on.

I've said this before, over consumption is a big problem, wasteful and polluting consumer practises should be curtailed and the economic system is FUBAR because it relies on everyone consuming far more than the planet can sustain, but at the moment, capitalism isn't going anywhere, consumerism isn't going anywhere, but with climate change we have a very real very serious threat that is going to require global focused and concerted action to mitigate, and it is not in opposition to sustainable economic development. If we are to solve climate change (or at least reduce it's impact) we're going to need to reform pretty much every element along the production/consumption/disposal life-cycle.

In Pharmaceutical GMP, there is enforced 'quality by design'. In the future, production of everything will have to be 'sustainable by design'

The fashion needs to change from the 'latest' technology to the 'greenest' technology. The incentives to produce need to be changed from selling the largest volume of goods, to producing the most good per unit of production.

It's not going to be easy, the global economic system is dominated by extremely bad actors. People who are manipulating the rules, the markets and the flow of information to benefit only their own private interests. They have been able to do this while the impacts of human over consumption have been obscured by natural variability or distance, but the effects of climate change, environmental destruction, the plastics we throw away, the soil we are depleting, the ground water we are wasting... these can only be ignored for so long before we have no choice but to notice them.

Climate change demands attention now, and that attention should also be used to protect all the valuable earths systems which we rely upon for our own survival

The Oort Cloud · 18-01-2019 9:56pm

Climate change demands attention now

Tinkering with the complex workings of the natural climate system will probably have an outcome much worse than what you are expecting it will achieve, experimenting with something so complex can also be detrimental to the habitation on this planet.

We all agree that pollution is a very serious issue today, that needs to be dealt with immediately. Be careful what you wish for while tampering with the climate.

18-01-2019 9:59pm

It would be fair to say that for basic radios and other products, their life is limited even if the hardware survives as soon there will be no analogue FM broadcasts for them to receive, in the same way as analogue TV's were rendered useless without adaptors.

In electronics, the older equipment actually has more points of failure than modern tech, simply because the circuitry was discrete (lots of individual components) as opposed to the high level of single chip integration that is often used in modern devices. Compare a cassette player to a modern MP3 for example, count the parts in each.
It is probably unrealistic to expect people not to want the latest and that most older kit will be dumped while still in perfect working condition, this is "perceived obsolescence" which unlike planned obsolescence the consumer is seduced to a newer device and just dumps the old one.

It is true to say that technology is advancing at a rapid pace and many products soon become completely outdated due to the race to market the latest and greatest, but it is important to remember that this only applies to certain sectors of the market. Planned obsolescence is rampant in almost all sectors, many of which really do not "advance" that quickly, it's these sectors where life limiting products is a real problem as often the replacement is almost identical as the failed unit.

Televisions for example should be expected to last 25 years, many of the Japanese models actually did last this long. Domestic white goods should last at least 20 years, but some now are being scrapped after less than 5 years.

Tackle excessive consumption and the environment will thank you for it.

Akrasia · 18-01-2019 11:18pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Tackle excessive consumption and the environment will thank you for it.

Ok, but how?

Akrasia · 18-01-2019 11:21pm

The Oort Cloud wrote: »

Tinkering with the complex workings of the natural climate system will probably have an outcome much worse than what you are expecting it will achieve, experimenting with something so complex can also be detrimental to the habitation on this planet.

We all agree that pollution is a very serious issue today, that needs to be dealt with immediately. Be careful what you wish for while tampering with the climate.

We are already tampering with the climate. We're just doing it as a side effect of generating energy.

You said before that the climate has always changed. What do you think caused it to change?

Dohnjoe · 18-01-2019 11:37pm

The Oort Cloud wrote: »

Tinkering with the complex workings of the natural climate system will probably have an outcome much worse than what you are expecting it will achieve, experimenting with something so complex can also be detrimental to the habitation on this planet.

We all agree that pollution is a very serious issue today, that needs to be dealt with immediately. Be careful what you wish for while tampering with the climate.

It's climate science, not witchcraft.

When they discovered the Ozone hole was actually increasing in size they determined that CFC's were one of the main causes for the expansion. The world then took action to drastically reduce CFCs.

marty.mc · 18-01-2019 11:49pm

Al Gore releases movie about climate change, makes millions, if it was all true why would Al Gore buy a 9 million dollar house by the ocean if he thinks that the oceans are going to rise by 10 feet?

18-01-2019 11:51pm

Akrasia wrote: »

Ok, but how?

It would be very difficult as it would involve reversing the trickle up economy, and one thing rich people hate, is having their money supply reduced!
With this in mind, what follows is really a fantasy that will not happen because it will not be allowed to happen!

Making it mandatory to produce durable products (where applicable, no need to make "kiss me quick hats" that last 20 years) so when someone buys a cooker for example, they know that it is likely to still be working decades later.
All of these long lived products will mean far less work in the manufacturing & retail sectors, this would need to be offset by paying more reasonable wages in the hospitality & care sectors.
The economy would need to be re-engineered so as to provide a universal basic income for all and requiring people to only work 20 hours a week or so.

Where does all the money come from you ask! The same place it does now, out of thin air. But we replace the "lend into existence" with "spend into existence" as all money is debt, banks create money to lend.
Governments should take the power to create money and spend it into existence, thus creating a more steady state economy, it will also put an end to the boom followed by bust followed by boom economic cycle we currently have.

Turning away from consumerism and adopting a buy when needed way of life will reduce environmental impact to a far greater extent than any other solution proposed as well as the added benefit that people will be able to enjoy life more as they will have more time to do things they want to do as opposed to working long hours to get money just to buy crap.

Dohnjoe · 18-01-2019 11:54pm

Deleted User wrote: »

It would be very difficult as it would involve reversing the trickle up economy, and one thing rich people hate, is having their money supply reduced!
With this in mind, what follows is really a fantasy that will not happen because it will not be allowed to happen!

Making it mandatory to produce durable products (where applicable, no need to make "kiss me quick hats" that last 20 years) so when someone buys a cooker for example, they know that it is likely to still be working decades later.
All of these long lived products will mean far less work in the manufacturing & retail sectors, this would need to be offset by paying more reasonable wages in the hospitality & care sectors.
The economy would need to be re-engineered so as to provide a universal basic income for all and requiring people to only work 20 hours a week or so.

Where does all the money come from you ask! The same place it does now, out of thin air. But we replace the "lend into existence" with "spend into existence" as all money is debt, banks create money to lend.
Governments should take the power to create money and spend it into existence, thus creating a more steady state economy, it will also put an end to the boom followed by bust followed by boom economic cycle we currently have.

Turning away from consumerism and adopting a buy when needed way of life will reduce environmental impact to a far greater extent than any other solution proposed as well as the added benefit that people will be able to enjoy life more as they will have more time to do things they want to do as opposed to working long hours to get money just to buy crap.

Sent from my iPhone

19-01-2019 12:05am

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Sent from my iPhone

One year from the quarry and probably less than one year from landfill!

Harry Palmr · 22-01-2019 2:12pm

Potential interesting development - a group are taking a case against the gubberment for their failure to protect the public from climate change under the National Mitigation Plan (2017)

https://www.rte.ie/news/2019/0122/1024777-climate-mitigation-high-court/

29-12-2019 5:11pm

An old video from the EU, that appears to show that the EU Parliament has failed to produce any results as we are no nearer to dealing with the high speed transition of raw materials into landfill that is the consumerist society that we live in.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toIFN8eR0ro

In the fight against planned obsolescence, the European Parliament wants to set minimum resistance criteria for products and better inform consumers about their durability. The aim is to encourage repair and reduce waste. The good news ? 77% of consumers in the EU would rather fix broken products than buy new ones.

Brid Hegarty · 23-07-2023 10:13am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/107643842#Comment_107643842

Temperatures have been pretty much stable up until the industrial revolution, and we're warmed about 1.2 degrees since then. That rate of warming is at least 15 times faster than anything that's been seen before. It's got nothing to do with the amount of warming, and more to do with the rate. That's what proves it's man-made

The IPCC takes model ensembles, meaning that it averages out the climate study predictions, and as you can see they are very accurate:

"Man-made" Climate Change Lunathicks Out in Full Force

Comments