An Australian yacht.

https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-13/australian-sailors-taking-greta-thunberg-back-to-un-cop25-summit/11699990?pfmredir=sm

The attachment at the top of the thread is the typical black & white dribble.

None of us can be perfect, but it would be a good start if some of these whinging people at least start to do a bit where they can.

Maybe they can start by walking to the shops for daily needs or ride an electric bike, its going to consume far less fossil fuel than a car.

We actually stopped ridding a bike & walk because we have to wear a helmet. Never wore one as a kid. Ironically twice in the past 12 months I have been hit by a car on a crossing & a footpath.

 bqt  wrote:  The problem with the whole global warming debate is that we all choose to believe the 'data' that suits our point of view. The fact that most of the debate is driven by politics makes everything so much more confusing. Me? I'm heading outback somewhere. I'm going to dig a hole and stick my head in it.           
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               Make sure beaul is not around with his sound proof generator !  

-- Edited by BW on Sunday 24th of November 2019 11:48:57 AM

I think China already had a bit of a go at it , did not work noticeably , but China is a bit wiser than a lot of others , I bet they have something cooking . Me I reckon Que Sera Sera . Batten the hatches we are in for it . To late .

Edit: As already seen with the bush fires . Get your caravans ready to move away from the Catastrophic areas . Most wise people probably have this in the back of their minds .

A snip from this article https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-13/australian-sailors-taking-greta-thunberg-back-to-un-cop25-summit/11699990?pfmredir=sm
Which, Whenarewethere, had kindly put up

Mr Whitelum said after confirming they were up for the challenge, he and Ms Carausu had been busy preparing for the trip and getting to know Ms Thunberg.
When I met her I wasn't ready for quite how young and short she would be," he said.
We've been hanging out basically for the last five or six days getting the boat prepared.
She's smart, kind of powerful and independent, she's a good person to have around

Mr Whitelum and Ms Carausu (his partner), are Australians, who have obviously met Greta Thunberg, outside of the media pressure

If he says that Greta is "smart, kind of powerful, and independent", then I doubt if any idiots, would have been able to brainwash her

Valkie wrote:

---

I have a question that I ask every time someone tries to berate me about working in the coal industry.

It goes like this.

Over the earth's history, we know that the earth has been through many heating and cooling cycles.
Not so long ago we went through an ice age.

Now all these heating and cooling events are well known with archaeological evidence in spades. If you look at rocks in the blue mountains you will often find shells from when it was under water.

Mankind wasn't around for most of these cycles.
And yet they happened anyway.

My question?
What caused these heating and cooling cycles, and how do we honestly know we are the cause of this one?

No one has yet to answer that question.
Although I do get quite a few insults thrown at me as a climate change denier, not quite as bad as a holocaust denier, but quickly getting to that level.

Don't get me wrong.
I believe we should stop polluting our planet.
But the biggest problem we have today isn't pollution or global warming.
Our biggest problem is the exponentially expanding population.
Too many people, far too many people.
We need to address this problem first, then much of the climate change will sort itself out as a result.
I'm talking about world wide compulsory birth prevention.
Only a small percentage SHOUKD be allowed to breed, based on their ability to support the child and pass on positive genes.

Compulsory contraception is the only way to limit uncontrolled breeding, refugee issues and illegal immigration.
No more need to channel billions into third world countries just so they can continue to breed uncontrolled.

Once the world's population gets to a Truely sustainable level, about 1/4 of what we have now, we can concentrate on bringing the health of our planet back.

Until then, it's simply a waste of time and we will outbreak our planets ability to continue far sooner than we will die of climate change.

---

Izabarack wrote:

---

bgt wrote:

---

..........we all choose to believe the 'data' that suits our point of view.

---

 No we dont.   Maybe you do but please dont try to speak for me.   Im a scientist.   I look at the research, the data, and how the data was collected, before drawing conclusions about anything.

Iza

---

 Phew, that makes 2 of us.  Do you know of any others? :)

Nothing wrong with acknowledging the existence of bias in it's many forms.

Unfortunately, many people have problems with science, especially when it supplies answers that they do not like or do not want to hear.  When science seems to conflict with a person's pre-conceived notions, beliefs, etc, a common response is denial. 

There is no doubt that science makes mistakes, and quite often. But the really great thing about science as a set of procedures /methods is that it is designed to be self-correcting. Science is a tool, like any other.  And like any other tool [say a knife], it can be used for good intentions or bad. 

So how do we tell the difference? 

The first thing is that science is an inherently sceptical process. The basic idea is to have two [or occasionally more] mutually exclusive and falsifiable hypotheses, and then test them honestly against all the available evidence.  Go to any reputable journal, like "Science" or "Nature" and you can see this happening. If errors are discovered [by anyone], these are rectified, or in severe cases [such as fraud], the article will be retracted. 
Scepticism is NOT cynicism, the late Clive James, although he had many good qualities, was a climate cynic. 
Ok, so you don't now much science? That is OK. Indeed, scientists outside their own areas of expertise are not as competent as one would think when dealing with stuff outside their own area. 
One thing we can all look at is "motivations".  We can probably all recall what happened about the issue of smoking and health. Scientists warning about the dangers of smoking could indeed make a living doing so.  But if a scientist wanted to make a real big wad of cash, they could pander to what the cigarette companies wanted them to say.  

And so it is with global warming. This is where people can do some ordinary research. Which sector gets more government incentives and tax breaks? The fossil fuels industry, or the renewable fuels industry? Generally speaking [although it varies with country], the fossil fuels industry gets the "lion's share".

Here is another thought. Human-caused global warming is simply not a political issue in Europe. Most parties [of any political flavour] take the realities of climate change as a given. The main bone of contention is on which policies each party prefer which is most in line with their ideologies. 

But here is a simple bit of practical science for you. 

You wake up one winter's morning and the sky is clear. You wake up one winter's morning, and the sky is overcast [but not actually raining]. Which is the warmer dawn? You guessed it, it is the dawn with clouds. If you know that, you can't be a climate-denier. I picked clouds because they consist of water vapour, with some dust etc, which makes them visible. Water vapour, like carbon dioxide, methane, etc, --are greenhouse gases. They tend to absorb high energy, short wavelength light [strictly speaking electromagnetic radiation, [or EMR] and emit longer wave, lower energy radiation. Hence the "blanket effect".

Carbon dioxide is not inevitably a problem so long as the rate of "clearance" by photosynthesis, sequestration [burial, etc] keeps up with the rates of production [from all sources, human and non-human]. Methane is even worse, because it absorbs more heat, and takes longer to be removed. 

So yes, before humans started to use lots of fossil fuels and other ways of producing greenhouse gases, the Earth was in a long term cycle of warming and cooling.  We were in an inter-glacial, heading towards another ice age. Our use of fossil fuels has stopped and reversed this trend. 

If its seems to you that the days are getting hotter, or the storms more frequent and severe compared to your days as a child, then you are correct. For those of you with a more academic interest, I recommend this paper:-

Sippel, S., et al. (2020). "Climate change now detectable from any single day of weather at global scale." Nature Climate Change 10(1): 35-41.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0666-7

For those of you without access to a university library, and for a more plain language account, see the Science Daily write-up of the paper above:-

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/01/200102143429.htm

Some times we go to the doc, and we get some bad news. How we deal with that information is a personal matter. But bad news about our planet is something else. It will affect everyone.  Anyway, thanks for reading. Questions /comments are welcome, and happy travelling.