JPF

iTrader: (1)

Sorry to go on about this global warming again , but am I just getting very paranoid now? definitely starting to worry a bit now I found this on a BBC site of all places!, so obviously propaganda.....

Check the thread out....
BBC - Weather Centre - Climate Change - Greenhouse Gases



"The Greenhouse Gases

Almost all of the Earth's atmosphere (99%) is made up of nitrogen (about 78%) and oxygen (about 21%). While both of these gases play important roles in the vast number of processes that support life on Earth, they play almost no direct role in regulating the climate. This is carried out by some of the trace gases in the remaining 1% of the atmosphere which occur in relatively small amounts:

* Carbon dioxide
* Methane
* Nitrous oxide
* Ozone
* Water vapour
* Halocarbons

Although the proportion of the trace gases in the atmosphere appears relatively small, they can still have a big impact on climate change - and they are mainly caused by human activities."


The main reason I had to post this was the last bit, what the ****!? man we must be like gods to produce that amount of water vapour alone!

I cant Wait for more people to wake up from this bull we are being told.

the ITV made me laugh today when they reported that the latest extreme rain fall was due to climate change ....NO SHT!! I thought it was always due to that

TopBanana

Amazing isn't it. They even claim to have landed on the moon!

Luminous

iTrader: (3)

I don't get your point JPF

kingofturds

iTrader: (1)

I thought climate change was going to lead to extreme droughts Oh yes I forgot that building on flood plains will not result in floodong

*Cino*

Global warming is just a cycle the earth takes, the earth has had an ice age before and now that time has come for another, nothing to do with humans, it's the earths cycle!

JPF

iTrader: (1)

I sent this to them ...wonder if I'll get a reply


To whom it may concern

I was just wondering exactly how the following are "mainly caused by human activities"?

Carbon dioxide
Methane
Nitrous oxide
Ozone
Water vapour
Halocarbons

if this is in fact true, can you please elaborate how and publish it alongside the information I am asking bout on your site.

Yours Sincerely
A person who doesn't like the BBC miss informing the public.




Now I didnot do to well at skoole I must addmitt), but how can all that gas be caused "mainly" by little old us?

I guess I'm just too naive but I used to trust what I heard on the BBC

As for natural cycles of the earth...how can people not know about that!? I kinda knew a bit about that when I learnt about mammoths etc when I was about six!

warrenm2

- Approx 95% of greenhouse gas warming is from water vapour, and approx 2.2% from CO2.
- Without greenhouse gases the earth would be approx 35C colder.
- Current CO2 concentrations are approx 300-350 ppm, in the past levels have been approx 7000ppm.
- In the 1200's Vikings farmed on Greenland - areas that are now covered in metres of snow
- Over the 20th century, average warming was 6/1000th of a degree per year
- There has been no average global warming since 1998
- Ice thickness in Eastern Antartica (the largest part) has increased over the last decade
- All measured warming has been at the Earths surface and not in the atmosphere as CO2 models predict it should
- In the last interglacial period, world temperatures were 5C warmer than today

Just some facts that dont always get mentioned

JPF

iTrader: (1)

Thanks ......so is it true that its man made then?

Where did you get those from? theres some I didn't know about in there.
I'm thinking of reading up on the subject as I'm getting peed off with all this crp going around about it being man-made, and that Co2 is Evil! OOooo....strange its so bad for us, since we wouldn't actually exist without it.

Can you recommend any good books? it would be nice to know a bit more about the science behind it all.

scunnered

iTrader: (1)

Climate change has already been mapped out for the next few hundred thousand years. The polititians know this, but have decided on a global scale that its a great way of screwing us out of money by raising taxes.(How higher taxes have a bearing on global warming is beyond me).
Most people were probably taught about the ice ages and stuff (global warming/cooling cycles) at school but seem to forget this when bombarded by government propaganda.

Do a google search for "Milankovitch theory", this will explain it all.

Abdabz

I saw a preview of a programme on the BBC website a few months ago and sent the producers the following email:

"I have just read the synopsis of the show regarding climate impact on the UK and am alarmed at the bias vitriol it has chosen to broadcast.

The programmes content and objective are instantly questionable...

Dr David Viner is one of the 2500 scientists who helped contribute to the inter-governmental panel on climate change report. It has since been established that far less than the 2500 scientists involved actually approved of the outcome of the report, as many had left the panel due to them understanding that the "science" behind the report was totally flawed... The report also falls down as a result of how it was funded and therefore the aim of the report was questionable before it ever began.It, therefore, should not be presented to the public as a definitive study. It is important that if the BBC do choose to use it at all, that they also refer to more factual evidence that actually contradicts it.

"Dr David Viner says that coastal erosion is likely"... The man is a Genius! No wonder he has his own TV show!!! We have had sand on the planet for millions of years... Coastal erosion is not new, nor a product of climate change. Buildings in Norfolk have been falling into the sea for as long as people have been building them. Even insinuating this is a result of climate change is quite preposterous.

Dr David Viner states that "2007 is already predicted to be the hottest on record". Who's records? There are records that show Greenland was once Green and farmed upon as opposed to it now being covered in snow. Will 2007 be warmer than it was then? We will all be advocating the "hockey stick" temperature charts next...

Quote "But the industry it spawned is the reason why our planet is warming now - and why Ironbridge itself is at risk." It is the BBC's job to report the facts. This quote is biased and unsubstantiated... There is no link to industry and climate change and it is essential that in the show Dr David Viner expressly point out that this is only his opinion...

Mullions harbour wall is (like the cliffs in Norfolk) likely to be breached and erode due to, yes, erosion. As mentioned earlier this is not related to climate change. A man made stone structure will over time erode as a result of wind, water and salt. This man is a scientist and should try to recreate scaled controlled conditions to see this for himself...

Finally, Dr David Viners concluded "As our BBC poll shows, some of you are still cynical about it. The changes we've already seen in England in this film, are just the start unless we, and the world, change our energy consumption." The changes in the film are not the start of anything. They are clearly just examples of general climate impact and erosion. They do not demonstrate climate change and more importantly, go no way whatsoever to linking climate change to man made causes.

The entire programme is flawed, biased and in-line with the BBC's one way agenda on the issue of climate change. There is not one example of irrefutable evidence anywhere on the planet that can link humans to climate change. The only way the BBC can win over the 22million people in this country alone (figures based on the BBC poll that confirms 34% of non-brainwashed educated people do no attribute human activity to climate change) is to open the debate up. Allow a scientist who can prove Dr Viner to be confused... Let us see the facts... Please stop this one sided journalism now and allow the public to make an educated informed decision...

Many Thanks"

I received an acknowledgement from the producer of the show and the letter was published on a comments section relating to the programme...

Funnily enough though the BBC never did accept my invitation to bring on scientists who could contradict the retarded presenter...

Hey ho.

warrenm2

jpf - lots of places. Try for starters:-

Global Temperature and Atmospheric CO2 over Geologic Time
Global Warming: A closer look at the numbers
Global Warming: A Convenient Lie

PeteBrant

You realise of course it doesn't matter what the truth of it is, and whether we like it or not. The western world is set on a course of reducing carbon emissions, every major political party in the UK sees it as a vote winner, therefore it will be an issue.

Yesterday Gordon Brown directly attributed the floods to Climate change, now, this is about as wrong as it gets, but that didn't stop him, and it won't stop lots of people beleiveing it is so.

We are going down the "climate change reduction" path, and there is nothing any of us can do about it.

TopBanana

Not so much a vote winner, but a stick to hit taxpayers with!

PeteBrant

Well it is perceived as a vote winner, because no party has come out against it - They know it would political suicide. Like it or not, the majority of the general public has been convinced of the man made effects on climate change.

Martin2005

I'm sorry but that is just about as dumb and inaccurate piece of nonesense I ever read.

The bloody governments of the world have been in collective denial for the past 10 years. It's ONLY because of public pressure, and the vast majority of the scientific evidence that governments are getting serious.

Why is it that people use dumb conspiracy theories to justify thier own biased positions.

The scientific community is now 90% certain that man is responsible for GW, you can't just dismiss that can you?

Jay m A

iTrader: (2)

The scientific community is now 90% funded by the bloody governments, you can't just dismiss that either can you?

warrenm2

Er yes because your statement is totally untrue. Could you show us research where this 90% figure came from? No you cant. I can point you to Global Warming Petition Project - Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine a petition of over 17000 scientists "denying" MMGW however.

Just because the BBC is behind it dont make it true Martin. Do some more reading

Martin2005

So?

The NHS is funded 100% by the government, are they lying to us?
The military is 100&% by the government are they lying too.......etc etc

Only here can GW be so easily dismissed, in the face of all the evidence.

I consider myself to be sceptical, but on balance I do feel the evidence is compelling.

Most of the comments on here are full of so much certainty...where does this certainty come from?

Martin2005

That would be the same petition that has been completely disowned by most of the scientist that signed it, leaving only the fruitcakes holding to thier denial position?

Come on man you can do better than that!

Jay m A

iTrader: (2)

Are you suggesting the NHS doesn't manipulate data etc so as to appease government targets?

warrenm2

Disowned by most of the scientist [sic] that signed it?

Evidence please? Or unsubstantiated claim to close down discussion?

PeteBrant

Ummm..... yes?

warrenm2

SteveV-WRX

Many times in the past, this country has been under 2 miles of ice and also a desert. It is part of a cycle that the world goes on, that is just huge in scope and scale.
Global warming is not a new phenomenon, and is at best, very minutely and locally effected by anything the human population can ever do at full industrial capacity, look at basic geographical data, in fact go to an open quary and you can see the changes in the strata of the ground!
Martin, if you would like another side to the arguement, read Michael Crichton's State of Fear, although a fiction piece about how governments use climate change to keep the population on the track that it wants to keep them on (sound familiar?), it has maybe 25/30 pages of statistical links to major studies by reputable institutes that can give a very interesting view.

S

Leslie

They say that this recent excessive rain has been caused by the high level jet streams which travel west to east and are caused by thermal differences in the air, have moved further south this year. This had had the effect of altering the pressure patterns at low level such that the Azores High is remaining over the Azores and allowing the Lows to come over us in a string with all the ensuing rain.

I don't know enough to say but it would seem to be more cyclical rather than being caused by global warming. Perhaps' there is an expert who could tell us the answer to that. Apart from the disstrous flooding, the countryside is at least looking better for the extra rain which we have not had for quite a few summers now.

Les

warrenm2

Good summary here Melanie Phillips’s Diary » The truly miraculous properties of carbon dioxide full of common sense

DaveD

iTrader: (2)

Just to point out:-
The 'human activities':-

* Carbon dioxide - comes from burning of carbon fuel, be it fossil fuel (coal, oil, gas) or 'renewables' wood, etc.
* Methane - from animals, especially since intensive farming of cattle that produce quite large volumes of the stuff!
* Nitrous oxide - Nox - impurities released from various combustion processes.
* Ozone - similar sources to Nox
* Water vapour - mainly from the vapor trails of aircraft
* Halocarbons - dunno?

As for man-made climate change, I'm on the fence. Can't imagine the amount of stuff we shove into the atmosphere can be too good locally, but is it having a global influence???

Gordo

I believe that man is causing global warming but think there's sod all we can do about it until we deal with population control.

Current population = 6bn (ish). population is forecast to grow to 9bn by 2040. i.e. we're fecked. there's little point in me going through the motions of 'recycling' or whatever other bull is thrown at us when, fundamentally, we're a population growing out of control in a closed system. at some point we'll outgrow our resources / ruin our environment and there will be a massive population crash. Bemuses me why this fundamental point is never raised.

Answer therefore has to be genocidal dictators

Martin2005

I think technology will be one way out of this potential mess.

Population growth as been (up to now) not really an issue as it's been the major industrialised nations, who have fairly stable population sizes that have been using most of the fossil based fuels. That's all about to change though with the Chinese and Indian ecconomies growing exponentially.

One of the things that really bothers me is the absolute certainty people use on this site when denying man-made GW is happening. How can people be so certain and why do people use silly conspiracy theories to try and justify doing nothing?

I am sceptical about most things, but I'm also a believer in cause and effect, for example, over fish the seas, we run out of fish, we burnt lots of coal, we had smogs and pollution.

Therefore how can we expect, releasing billions of tonnes of CO2, that has been undergrownd for millions of years, at the same time as tearing down millions and millions of acres of rainforest isn't having an effect?

One more thing that annoys me people that say with certainty that this isn't a man-made issue often say silly things like, 'we've had iceages before' or 'the UK used to be a desert'. Well don't you think the scientist know that too, do you not think they've factored that into their assestments?

Prasius

iTrader: (1)

I am very sceptical of man-made climate change, however, still supports the idea that switching lights off when your not in the room is a good idea.

You mean the millions and millions of acres of rainforest thats torn down in order to grow Soya, mainly eaten, oddly enough, by the same people who demonise me for not walking 90 miles home at weekends?

No I don't - or more to the point, they simplify it so massively that the fine details regarding cyclic climate change, and the effect that human activity has on it, are wiped out in order to satisfy the "YOUR KILLING THE PLANET!!!" bunch.

What is beyond doubt, however, is that the Government and some companies are cynically exploiting the climate-change issue for revenue raising and profit making reasons.

There is so much that could be done to lesson the impact of humans on this planet, yet, because the vast majority of the truely worthwhile ones involve either spending money nationally to subsidise solar panels for housing ect, making a stand against countries such as Brazil to pressure them to halt illegal and legal logging in the amazon, and encouraging and supporting developing nations to utilise renewable energy rather than build coal power station after coal power station.

The nonsense such as Vauxhalls latest marketing gimmick encouraging people to trade in their old "polluting" car in order to buy a nice, shiny, newly made "less polluting" car and the BBC's constant unbalanced propoganda is what makes me totally sick of the whole climate change issue; let alone those self-promoting arseholes who claim to be musicians, lecturing me on my carbon footprint, while they fly around the world constantly with their 20 person entourage, burn 1000's of watts of electricity powering their massive screens, huge amps, and shove cocaine up their nose grown and processed in illegally logged rainforest clearings.

It wasn't that long ago that the same bunch were warning that all the trees were going to die in 10 years because of acid rain, and looking out of my window - the trees still look fine