Usual disclaimer I knew very little of Greta Thunberg, prior to her rise in popularity, but after looking at many websites, (even some condemning her), I am on her side
Do not want to start a bun fight But.... This snip from the attachment 16-year old who does not know the difference between her pampered behind and a fracking hole in the ground, who was flown to New York in a CO2-spewing airplane. Is just not true
Greta Thunberg travelled on a Yacht (err a boat with sails), and then by electric car, to get to New York, not an aircraft
An easier way to alleviate the fears of our grandchildren, rather than take all their luxuries from them. Is to just point out the programs our current leaders have in place, to slow down the man made portion, of the global warming
Such as
err
err, err
err, err, and err
For all I know, they may have more programs in place
Perhaps the children of today, will start talking to the Scientists, when they become, the youngest leaders we have ever had
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.
Phillipn said
10:02 AM Nov 24, 2019
Tony Bev wrote:
Usual disclaimer I knew very little of Greta Thunberg, prior to her rise in popularity, but after looking at many websites, (even some condemning her), I am on her side
Do not want to start a bun fight But.... This snip from the attachment 16-year old who does not know the difference between her pampered behind and a fracking hole in the ground, who was flown to New York in a CO2-spewing airplane. Is just not true
Greta Thunberg travelled on a Yacht (err a boat with sails), and then by electric car, to get to New York, not an aircraft
An easier way to alleviate the fears of our grandchildren, rather than take all their luxuries from them. Is to just point out the programs our current leaders have in place, to slow down the man made portion, of the global warming
Such as
err
err, err
err, err, and err
For all I know, they may have more programs in place
Perhaps the children of today, will start talking to the Scientists, when they become, the youngest leaders we have ever had
She has been brain washed by idiots.
bgt said
10:54 AM Nov 24, 2019
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.
Grandad5 said
10:59 AM Nov 24, 2019
My own personal take on all this is that Greta wasted her time. As much as I wish that were not so. Nobody was/is listening at the UN. Her speech will have no more affect than that of Severn Suzuki back in 1992. Nobody listened to her either.
It's been pointed out by the deniers that Australia's Co2 emissions is something like 1 or 2% of total emissions worldwide so what point is there in reducing our contribution? That figure is probably correct. There's a certain amount of logic to that argument. But, it's used as a justification for just continuing as we have done for the past umpteen years.
It's also been pointed out that population growth worldwide is the main cause of climate change. That's certainly true to a point but the deniers seem to like to use this argument as proof that since nothing can be done about world population there is no point in doing anything at all about any other cause of the problem.
At the end of the day, it's too late to stop the effect of mankind's influence on the worlds climate. Climate change is here now and will continue to get worse.
You disagree with that? Saw a T-Shirt once that said "Science doesn't care about your opinion". So if science doesn't care. Why should I?
Given that we're here on a forum dedicated to Grey Nomads its safe to assume our average age is such that none of us will be around to experience the worst that nature is offering up to us. (With apologies to those not so grey nomads amongst us) So, all the people denying that there is any cause for alarm will have zero effect on the outcome. Or be here to find out whether they were right or wrong.
The same can be said for those of us wanting to try to do something of course. Debating here will have no effect on the outcome.
As I said earlier. Climate Change is not only real, but is here now. Our goals as a country must be to do whatever little bit can be done to not exasperate the problem of course but more so, to prepare our communities and ourselves to live in a world that will be totally different to the world we have today.
And that IS being done. I live in Bendigo and will use Bendigo as just one example.
Heres an article from our local paper pointing out that we are going to be losing what tree cover we currently have as our mainly European species come to the end of their natural life and how important it is to do something about it.
I read an answer on Quora recently about whether or not Australia could ever be self-sufficient for food and energy. The summary was, yes we can. It will take a rethink of how we do things and what crops farmers grow. It may also require changing where we farm to reduce the use of fossil fuels to transport the food to market but it can be done. Of course, consumers expectations of being able to buy fruit and vegetables 12 months of the year regardless of seasons will have to change. But on the whole, were in a good place for our grandchildren to survive and have a happy and productive life.
Water, will be our biggest challenge but that too can be handled with a change of attitude to what water is used for and how much we use.
So, post away with as many Memes, Word Docs or links to some individual scientist who doesnt agree with the majority of his fellow scientists. It wont make a twopence of difference. People ARE preparing for the worst.
Its a great pity we didnt start 20 years ago, but we cant go back in time.
As for me. Ive lost two trees from my nature strip over the last 10 years, so Ive planted 6 more. Its not much but as a pensioner at least Im trying to do something. Planting some trees and installing a water tank is something productive I can personally do.
Debating with climate deniers will do nothing so I wont.
You all have a wonderful time with the time you have left in this world. And I hope it's a long time. It would seem that there are many other, younger people who are planning ahead to look after our grandchildren so I'm confident our beautiful country will survive (with a few changes) with or without us.
Cheers
Jim
BW said
11:45 AM Nov 24, 2019
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
-- Edited by BW on Sunday 24th of November 2019 11:50:20 AM
TheHeaths said
11:47 AM Nov 24, 2019
My only comment would be that any efforts that are directed at making the world a better place to live for everyone really can't be bad can they?
Believe in climate change or not, I would rather try to improve the place than not.
bgt said
12:26 PM Nov 24, 2019
TheHeaths you make a very valid comment. The next generations are looking to this generation to leave them a better world. No one disputes that. Where the problem is is how we do it. The so called 'deniers' want a steady as she goes approach. Whereas those looking for a faster change seem to be ignoring the consequences of their goals. Anyone promoting a common sense approach is called a denier. Anyone promoting an emergency is ignoring the practicalities. There is an answer to how we get a better world. Getting all steamed up about it is not achieving anything. Many global warming advocates simply will not accept that others may have a different point of view. The common sense debate has been thrown away in the name of ideaology. Politics is driving much of the debate. Until there is a calm and ration debate nothing is going to happen. Name calling is a childish response that doesn't help.
Valkie said
01:10 PM Nov 24, 2019
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.
BW said
01:31 PM Nov 24, 2019
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 .
-- Edited by BW on Sunday 24th of November 2019 06:13:54 PM
Whenarewethere said
03:58 PM Nov 24, 2019
TheHeaths wrote:
My only comment would be that any efforts that are directed at making the world a better place to live for everyone really can't be bad can they?
Believe in climate change or not, I would rather try to improve the place than not.
Agree. One could look at it as insurance.
Sydney uses 0.5% of its water capacity each week, if everyone puts in a bit of effort it may just last long enough until it rains. We did it a decade ago.
Just because Johnny doesn't contribute, saying I'm not going to contribute is childish, whether it's water or the climate overall.
I feel a bit happier that the grandchildren know we tried rather than making excuses.
Izabarack said
05:08 PM Nov 24, 2019
Clearing the trees to plant high density housing permanently changes the weather. Even the most ardent deniers do not dispute that. The arguments about climate change are not far off becoming discussion about how humans will survive. My grandkids and grandkids already know that Greta's approach is more likely to leave a world they can live in compared to any concentration on "the economy".
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
Izabarack said
10:15 PM Nov 24, 2019
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
dogbox said
01:44 PM Nov 25, 2019
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.
climate change has been going on for millions of years mankind has only been here a short time ,overpopulation is the problem. look at Chernobyl nature is repairing it self. when we destroy the earth as we know it like a paddock that has been over grazed an the stock has starved it will repair itself. mankind just might not be here to see it
Phillipn said
02:05 PM Nov 25, 2019
Using Glacier Bay in Alaska as an example for global warming, the bay was discovered around 1760, the glacier face was at the sea. The map shows how the glacier retreated over the years.
Their were no cars or planes to cause global warming.
..........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.
Greystone said
08:59 AM Dec 6, 2019
This excellent article clearly shows that my 6 year old grand child has not and will never experience a cool summer like I did when I was his age. In my lifetime there have been significant increases in temperatures and the future looks bleak.
How global warming is changing childhood
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-06/how-climate-change-has-impacted-your-life/11766018
RJ65 said
03:20 PM Jan 14, 2020
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:-
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.
dogbox said
03:32 PM Jan 14, 2020
Greystone wrote:
This excellent article clearly shows that my 6 year old grand child has not and will never experience a cool summer like I did when I was his age. In my lifetime there have been significant increases in temperatures and the future looks bleak.
How global warming is changing childhood http://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-06/how-climate-change-has-impacted-your-life/11766018
the west coast of Canada is experiencing its coldest winter in decades and I read somewhere that gps had to be adjusted as nsw has moved 18 meters north
if these are true is the earth's tilt changing ??
Grandad5 said
04:50 PM Jan 14, 2020
dogbox wrote:
the west coast of Canada is experiencing its coldest winter in decades
and I read somewhere that gps had to be adjusted as nsw has moved 18 meters north
some of this posted but not all?
Usual disclaimer
I knew very little of Greta Thunberg, prior to her rise in popularity, but after looking at many websites, (even some condemning her), I am on her side
Do not want to start a bun fight
But....
This snip from the attachment
Is just not true
Greta Thunberg travelled on a Yacht (err a boat with sails), and then by electric car, to get to New York, not an aircraft
An easier way to alleviate the fears of our grandchildren, rather than take all their luxuries from them.
Is to just point out the programs our current leaders have in place, to slow down the man made portion, of the global warming
Such as
For all I know, they may have more programs in place
Perhaps the children of today, will start talking to the Scientists, when they become, the youngest leaders we have ever had
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.
She has been brain washed by idiots.
My own personal take on all this is that Greta wasted her time. As much as I wish that were not so. Nobody was/is listening at the UN. Her speech will have no more affect than that of Severn Suzuki back in 1992. Nobody listened to her either.
It's been pointed out by the deniers that Australia's Co2 emissions is something like 1 or 2% of total emissions worldwide so what point is there in reducing our contribution? That figure is probably correct. There's a certain amount of logic to that argument. But, it's used as a justification for just continuing as we have done for the past umpteen years.
It's also been pointed out that population growth worldwide is the main cause of climate change. That's certainly true to a point but the deniers seem to like to use this argument as proof that since nothing can be done about world population there is no point in doing anything at all about any other cause of the problem.
At the end of the day, it's too late to stop the effect of mankind's influence on the worlds climate. Climate change is here now and will continue to get worse.
You disagree with that? Saw a T-Shirt once that said "Science doesn't care about your opinion". So if science doesn't care. Why should I?
Given that we're here on a forum dedicated to Grey Nomads its safe to assume our average age is such that none of us will be around to experience the worst that nature is offering up to us. (With apologies to those not so grey nomads amongst us) So, all the people denying that there is any cause for alarm will have zero effect on the outcome. Or be here to find out whether they were right or wrong.
The same can be said for those of us wanting to try to do something of course. Debating here will have no effect on the outcome.
As I said earlier. Climate Change is not only real, but is here now. Our goals as a country must be to do whatever little bit can be done to not exasperate the problem of course but more so, to prepare our communities and ourselves to live in a world that will be totally different to the world we have today.
And that IS being done. I live in Bendigo and will use Bendigo as just one example.
Heres an article from our local paper pointing out that we are going to be losing what tree cover we currently have as our mainly European species come to the end of their natural life and how important it is to do something about it.
https://www.bendigoadvertiser.com.au/story/5841557/tree-loss-leaves-bendigo-vulnerable-as-temperatures-set-to-rise/
And heres another from our local council that shows the many and varied ways they are preparing for the future, including planting more trees.
https://www.leadlm.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/City-of-Greater-Bendigo-Environment-Strategy-2016-2021.pdf
I read an answer on Quora recently about whether or not Australia could ever be self-sufficient for food and energy. The summary was, yes we can. It will take a rethink of how we do things and what crops farmers grow. It may also require changing where we farm to reduce the use of fossil fuels to transport the food to market but it can be done. Of course, consumers expectations of being able to buy fruit and vegetables 12 months of the year regardless of seasons will have to change. But on the whole, were in a good place for our grandchildren to survive and have a happy and productive life.
Water, will be our biggest challenge but that too can be handled with a change of attitude to what water is used for and how much we use.
So, post away with as many Memes, Word Docs or links to some individual scientist who doesnt agree with the majority of his fellow scientists. It wont make a twopence of difference. People ARE preparing for the worst.
Its a great pity we didnt start 20 years ago, but we cant go back in time.
As for me. Ive lost two trees from my nature strip over the last 10 years, so Ive planted 6 more. Its not much but as a pensioner at least Im trying to do something.
Planting some trees and installing a water tank is something productive I can personally do.
Debating with climate deniers will do nothing so I wont.
You all have a wonderful time with the time you have left in this world. And I hope it's a long time.
It would seem that there are many other, younger people who are planning ahead to look after our grandchildren so I'm confident our beautiful country will survive (with a few changes) with or without us.
Cheers
Jim
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
-- Edited by BW on Sunday 24th of November 2019 11:50:20 AM
Believe in climate change or not, I would rather try to improve the place than not.
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 .
-- Edited by BW on Sunday 24th of November 2019 06:13:54 PM
Agree. One could look at it as insurance.
Sydney uses 0.5% of its water capacity each week, if everyone puts in a bit of effort it may just last long enough until it rains. We did it a decade ago.
Just because Johnny doesn't contribute, saying I'm not going to contribute is childish, whether it's water or the climate overall.
I feel a bit happier that the grandchildren know we tried rather than making excuses.
Iza
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 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
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
climate change has been going on for millions of years mankind has only been here a short time ,overpopulation is the problem.
look at Chernobyl nature is repairing it self. when we destroy the earth as we know it like a paddock that has been over grazed an the stock has starved it will repair itself. mankind just might not be here to see it
Using Glacier Bay in Alaska as an example for global warming, the bay was discovered around 1760, the glacier face was at the sea. The map shows how the glacier retreated over the years.
Their were no cars or planes to cause global warming.
chinas great green wall
May I assist with that link? Its a video worth watching.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSn6S-H7m-8
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.
the west coast of Canada is experiencing its coldest winter in decades
and I read somewhere that gps had to be adjusted as nsw has moved 18 meters north
if these are true is the earth's tilt changing ??
the west coast of Canada is experiencing its coldest winter in decades
Apparently, yes. The tilt is changing.
https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2805/scientists-id-three-causes-of-earths-spin-axis-drift/
Jim