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

GERALD FLEMING ON RTE LAST NIGHT

1235789

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,346 ✭✭✭easypazz


    Please provide evidence to back up these claims.

    He now accepts 10mm a year is possible. Thats 300mm by 2050, which is what RTE said. I dont think we will be at 300mm by 2050, time will tell.

    In that scenario a storm surge spring tide could be reaching the underside of o'connell bridge. if this happens a flooded liffey will back up and the rain water will have to flow over oconnell bridge, or along the quays etc.

    I am not saying the above will happen, but if the right mix of conditions occur, heavy flood upstream, storm surge downstream, spring tide, 300mm higher sea level, then the water needs to go somewhere.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 508 ✭✭✭ Zainab Tiny Misfortune


    I know it's non-linear, that's why I've given 2 different rates. Sources for what? Sea level? I quoted that yesterday.

    Did you make up those rates?


  • Registered Users Posts: 177 ✭✭odyboody


    I would just like to point out that Science that say temps, co2 and sea levels have been rising and we are all doomed. These are are the same guys that said back in the early 1970s that we were on the verge of a mini ice age, they used data to back that up as well. Oh and big business were trying to sell us **** then as well.

    Believe climate change is happening and one of the biggest successes of modern advertising is to persuade us that we are responsible for it.
    No amount of individual changes will make a difference until big business is stopped from harvesting the lungs of the planet from the rain forests.

    Activists fly from event to event. you would need to drive your modern diesel for 3.5 years to put the same amount of co2 into the atmosphere as flying for 1 hour


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Gaoth Laidir


    easypazz wrote: »
    He now accepts 10mm a year is possible. Thats 300mm by 2050, which is what RTE said. I dont think we will be at 300mm by 2050, time will tell.

    In that scenario a storm surge spring tide could be reaching the underside of o'connell bridge. if this happens a flooded liffey will back up and the rain water will have to flow over oconnell bridge, or along the quays etc.

    I am not saying the above will happen, but if the right mix of conditions occur, heavy flood upstream, storm surge downstream, spring tide, 300mm higher sea level, then the water needs to go somewhere.

    FFS would you please stop misquoting me. I did NOT say that. What a pathetic attempt to wallpaper over your previous glaring errors and avoid answering the questions I asked you. Take it back.


  • Registered Users Posts: 28,703 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    odyboody wrote:
    Believe climate change is happening and one of the biggest successes of modern advertising is to persuade us that we are responsible for it. No amount of individual changes will make a difference until big business is stopped from harvesting the lungs of the planet from the rain forests.


    So let's do nothing, as the accumulated actions of all humans is pointless


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Gaoth Laidir


    Did you make up those rates?

    The source I gave yesterday (NOAA) gives the current rate as 3.3 mm/yr. The 140-yr average ris is 1.6 mm/yr. On the current trends the 10 mm/yr rate will not occur for centuries. Extrapolate the curve.


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,802 ✭✭✭✭NIMAN


    easypazz wrote: »
    The picture is accurate, it just depends on how soon it happens

    When the sea rises 1 metre then a strong wind behind it and a spring tide and we could be looking at that sort of situation arising in as soon as 100 years.

    The important bit of your reply is "we could be".

    It's all guessing at the minute. Yeah and we might not as well. It might take 1000 years to get to that picture, but are we not being told this is what 2050 has in store for us?

    It's Daily Mail level reporting, and the fact that rte are reporting it as fact is shocking imho.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 508 ✭✭✭ Zainab Tiny Misfortune


    The source I gave yesterday (NOAA) gives the current rate as 3.3 mm/yr. The 140-yr average ris is 1.6 mm/yr. On the current trends the 10 mm/yr rate will not occur for centuries. Extrapolate the curve.

    There are tipping points.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,346 ✭✭✭easypazz


    It is highly unlikely to reach that figure in the next few centuries. After that, if it did rise by that rate then of course it would rise by 1 metre in 100 years. What's your point? Please let us know what you meant by "soon".

    Why is it highly unlikely, have you a source for that?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 508 ✭✭✭ Zainab Tiny Misfortune


    NIMAN wrote: »
    The important bit of your reply is "we could be".

    It's all guessing at the minute. Yeah and we might not as well. It might take 1000 years to get to that picture, but are we not being told this is what 2050 has in store for us?

    It's Daily Mail level reporting, and the fact that rte are reporting it as fact is shocking imho.

    It's a projection with quantified uncertainty. The we could be refers to an outcome with an attached probability. And the probability of it happening is far greater than the probability of it not. The same way we could win the next world cup. But the likelihood is slim.

    I'm not gonna bet on Ireland's chances in either


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 508 ✭✭✭ Zainab Tiny Misfortune


    easypazz wrote: »
    Why is it highly unlikely, have you a source for that?

    He is extrapolating a trend without accounting for tipping points


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Gaoth Laidir


    There are tipping points.

    What are these tipping points? When will 10 mm/yr be achieved? Do you have a source?


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Gaoth Laidir


    easypazz wrote: »
    Why is it highly unlikely, have you a source for that?

    I answered above.

    Now, do you have answers to my questions or are you just going to waste time and mirror oldbee's posts?


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,426 ✭✭✭ZX7R


    At first it was global warming ,the same fact's and figures were used then, funny global warming did not pan out as the experts said,then it was climate change pretty much the same fact's and figures been thrown around again.
    There is too many elephants in the room.
    The facts and figures don't match up and when people show that they don't climates refuse to have rational debate.
    Someone posted that 2000 scientists singed up to climate change
    How many have any expertise in climatology.
    As for Gerald Fleming how much did rte pay him for the show at the end of the day money talks the loudest.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,346 ✭✭✭easypazz


    ZX7R wrote: »
    At first it was global warming ,the same fact's and figures were used then, funny global warming did not pan out as the experts said,then it was climate change pretty much the same fact's and figures been thrown around again.
    There is too many elephants in the room.
    The facts and figures don't match up and when people show that they don't climates refuse to have rational debate.
    Someone posted that 2000 scientists singed up to climate change
    How many have any expertise in climatology.
    As for Gerald Fleming how much did rte pay him for the show at the end of the day money talks the loudest.

    Global warming is panning out as predicted. The planet has warmup up, the oceans have warmed up, the water has expanded with the heat and sea levels have risen.

    Just saying.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,007 ✭✭✭Longing


    easypazz wrote: »
    Global warming is panning out as predicted. The planet has warmup up, the oceans have warmed up, the water has expanded with the heat and sea levels have risen.

    Just saying.

    Please show the data that the planet is warming from 2012.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,426 ✭✭✭ZX7R


    easypazz wrote: »
    Global warming is panning out as predicted. The planet has warmup up, the oceans have warmed up, the water has expanded with the heat and sea levels have risen.

    Just saying.

    It hasn't that is the point, not to the degree as was predicted,if it was you would never have heard it called climate change.

    Just saying.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Gaoth Laidir


    easypazz wrote: »
    Global warming is panning out as predicted. The planet has warmup up, the oceans have warmed up, the water has expanded with the heat and sea levels have risen.

    Just saying.

    Any sign of those answers I was looking for earlier? Your previous "facts" were shown to be completely wrong, you changed your story about the 2050 image, and you just blatantly lied about what I had said. All the time ignoring my requests for answers.

    You've proven yourself to be unable to hold a simple debate on a science forum, instead merely putting out "facts" that you either pulled out of your head or took from someone else's posts. So again, post sources for your claims or stop wasting people's time.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,011 ✭✭✭John.Icy


    Longing wrote: »
    Please show the data that the planet is warming from 2012.

    It is??

    I'm against alarmist agendas too but the above stuff is extremely easy to find. 2018 and 2017 weren't as hot as previous years 2016 and 2015 but all these years have been amongst the hottest on record. Is that enough for you? Go google it, readily available data. The last 5 years have been the warmest on record.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,346 ✭✭✭easypazz


    Any sign of those answers I was looking for earlier? Your previous "facts" were shown to be completely wrong, you changed your story about the 2050 image, and you just blatantly lied about what I had said. All the time ignoring my requests for answers.

    You've proven yourself to be unable to hold a simple debate on a science forum, instead merely putting out "facts" that you either pulled out of your head or took from someone else's posts. So again, post sources for your claims or stop wasting people's time.

    What claims are you asking me for sources for?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Gaoth Laidir


    easypazz wrote: »
    What claims are you asking me for sources for?

    Maybe you have me on ignore list or something.
    Exactly from when are you basing your figures? Since the last Ice Age?
    What is "soon"? I reckon the image below shows the water level to be about 3 metres above the current record high water mark for this location. About 3000 mm. At your current rate of 3.5 mm/yr, that would take about 850 years to achieve. Even taking a crazy faster rate of say 10 mm/yr (highly unlikely) and it would still take 300 years. Does that seem like soon to you?

    "When the sea rises 1 metre". When do you think that will be, given that it's only risen about 250 mm in the past 140 years? Where will the extra 2 metres come from to give that level of water in the image?

    And now here are more points you've just stated on the fly. I'd like to see your source that supports your claim that "global warming is panning out as predicted", given the chart below, which continues to show observations (black) dredging the very bottom of the "business as usual" RCP4.5 scenario projections (using the HadCRUT4 dataset).
    easypazz wrote: »
    Global warming is panning out as predicted. The planet has warmup up, the oceans have warmed up, the water has expanded with the heat and sea levels have risen.

    Just saying.

    495449.png


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,007 ✭✭✭Longing


    John.Icy wrote: »
    It is??

    I'm against alarmist agendas too but the above stuff is extremely easy to find. 2018 and 2017 weren't as hot as previous years 2016 and 2015 but all these years have been amongst the hottest on record. Is that enough for you? Go google it, readily available data. The last 5 years have been the warmest on record.

    It is if you only go back 50 years. But 50 years on this planet is a drop in the ocean.

    img_0585.gif?w=600&zoom=2


    Actually the last peak was in 2008 not 2012 as i mentioned in my last post. It must be old age. The earth as been cooling since.

    I don't deny climate change our climate is always changing and that is the elephant in the room. I believe Milankovitch cycles has great effect on our climate. These cycles will have effect on our climate has our planet wobbles. Milankovitch Theory should be explained in all schools instead of catastrophizing the future of our children. Children going out on strike missing school because what is printed or shown in the media is truly mind blown. Anyway going away from topic. Man likes to be superior in every way a ruler a controller and a know all. Peace out.


  • Registered Users Posts: 335 ✭✭boring accountant


    spookwoman wrote: »
    Server farms are a big culprit as well for producing CO2 and they are on the increase


    Except those server farms host data from all across Europe so really the CO2 emissions aren't all because of us.


    Just like our farming emissions aren't because of us since we only consume a fraction of what we produce.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,235 ✭✭✭Oneiric 3


    Well if fire and flood is not enough to scare us into submission, perhaps the threat of pestilence and disease will:



    Could help with the global population figures though, since the cultists are always telling us there are too many people on the planet as it is, because, coming from secure positions of privileged, they and they alone can get to decide that.

    New Moon



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 508 ✭✭✭ Zainab Tiny Misfortune


    What are these tipping points? When will 10 mm/yr be achieved? Do you have a source?

    https://www.ipcc.ch/srocc/home/

    And references therein.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Gaoth Laidir


    https://www.ipcc.ch/srocc/home/

    And references therein.

    Thanks for the link but that's the lazy reply. I asked you what the tipping points are and when you think that rate of rise will be achieved, given that you were quick to jump on my posts. You must know when if you're saying mine is wrong.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,981 ✭✭✭Naggdefy


    A bit of an aside here but how much damage would a conflict like WW2 have done to the environment in terms of CO2 emissions etc. Apart from the fuel used in campaigns, when you look at the resources used as economies adapted to total war on the home front.

    To my unqualified mind 6 years of war like that must equal the emissions of 20-30 years of relative peace.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,235 ✭✭✭Oneiric 3


    Naggdefy wrote: »
    A bit of an aside here but how much damage would a conflict like WW2 have done to the environment in terms of CO2 emissions etc. Apart from the fuel used in campaigns, when you look at the resources used as economies adapted to total war on the home front.

    To my unqualified mind 6 years of war like that must equal the emissions of 20-30 years of relative peace.

    I wonder were there any overly entitled, trust-fund 'climate protesters' around that time, preaching about the end of days while tens of millions of Europeans were being slaughtered?

    478785-01-02.gif

    Never has the howl of hubris sounded so foul on the ear, but as the old saying goes, hubris always comes before the fall.

    New Moon



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Gaoth Laidir


    Just some more food for thought. The loss in Swiss glaciers continues at the same rate as it was way back in 1860. No acceleration, despite what we're being led to believe. So both Arctic sea ice and the Greenland glaciers melts have leveled off and Swiss glaciers continue their normal loss coming out of the Little Ice Age.

    https://twitter.com/IncredibleClim1/status/1185193510275813376


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,029 ✭✭✭ Ronald Fancy Slope


    There is a great book called "Factfulness: Ten Reasons We're Wrong About the World — and Why Things Are Better Than You Think"

    Excellent book and brings a level of calmness to a lot of the scaremongering in the world today. A book recommended by Bill Gates amongst others.

    Yes, we should be more mindful of the environment but let's not lose the run of ourselves.


Advertisement