Climate change is a complete hoax

The Lobby
189

Hi, @peterma :slight_smile:

I don’t think comparing markets with Earth makes any sense at all. A market has no independent existence beyond the participants that form that market (apart from the infrastructure that facilitates that market to perform). Take all the actors away and the market evaporates. To describe a market as having an intelligence is really just poetic romanticism to describe the movements of any market that is so enormous as to be beyond the ability of any one person to encompass all the factors impinging upon its movements.

But the Earth is totally different, It was here, and is here, and probably will continue to be here, whether there is a human species here or not. A market IS its participants and ONLY its participants - but the earth is here whether we are visiting it or not. It has its own existence within the universe, independent of the human race, and, as @Falstaff points out, is very much subject to those forces that the universe imposes upon it (leaving religious issues aside).

Surely the issue right here in this debate is: Are we, the human race, now large enough to also be forming an additional force powerful enough to also be impacting the nature of our Earth, and, if so, is that force positive or negative, and, can we, should we, be in control of such a force that we have created?

Can such a small entity such as the human race really impact upon and within the might of the Universe? I don’t know.
Can one person really impact upon and within the might of the financial markets? I don’t know that either, but you could try asking Mr Trump…………:slight_smile:

190

Great comment.

1 Like
191

Personally, I don’t this is a great comment at all! Quite the opposite, in fact!

It is, misleadingly dangerous and promotes an attitude of lethargy towards a topic that potentially may end in irrepairable damage to our entire existence of a species as well as to the existence of countless numbers of innocent other species of flora, fauna, etc.

The “market” is not a “third party” with a mind, intelligence and will of its own. It is purely the combined net action of those active in and on that market - take them away and the whole market vanishes instantly.

The market only seems to have an identity and intelligence of its own if and because it is too big for any one personal to be capable of identifying all the activity taking place in it.

To assume that the world and the markets are one and the same in character, each with its own mind regardless of our collective input is to instill a sense of complacency and an attitude of fatalistic “there is nothing I can do about it anyway”.

There is, in my opinion, sufficient evidence to show that there are significant and dangerous changes occurring, the consequences of which, if correct, may be catastophic and irreversible in our future. And in any SWOT type analysis, that kind of threat/consequence demands serious attention, not an “oh well, it is the Earth’s own problem not mine, let the globe sort itself out”.

It is a sad indictment of the stupidity of the human race that it can ignore such issues but happily and readily throws missiles at each other killing innocent people. But I really shouldn’t be commenting here, I resigned from the human race over 20 years ago. I do my bit, that’s about all I can manage! :slight_smile:

I really didn’t mean to get involved in this debate, although it is a very serious issue, I just wanted to point @tommor to another major release that he may not have seen. Sorry to tread on toes here :smiley:

192

This discussion is all good fun, but pointless. Despite having been involved in environmental work over years, I don’t avidly follow news on climate change so I often don’t get to see news that others think is significant. I think I should review the subject in a couple of years: if at that time the majority of scientists have decided it was all a hoax, I shall accept what they say.

1 Like
193

Our debate is quite meaningless save for stimulating thought which is always a good thing.

I’m big into re-cycling, walking to work, not buying plastic bags etc but I know none of these things will change anything. Next time I go on hols I’ll have undone about 20 years worth of good.

I mentioned technology, there lies the problem and there will be the solution.

My car switches itself off at traffic lights and woohoo I saved x emissions - then quietly an even larger 4X4 pulls up alongside me, the driver looks over, he has a smug look on his face, both cars sit there - not a sound.

The light turns green, my car jumps into life with it’s cloud of invisible emmisions blown skyward - the smug guy also moves off but without a sound - he is battery powered.

2 Likes
194

Ok thanks for the clarification. I’ll leave you guys to it! :laughing:

195

This is surely both the truth _and the deception?

I feel the same way. I recycle my plastics (and everything else) and I know none of it gets to the seas and can feel good about that - but it means nothing when ocean vessels simply open their side door and dump all their waste straight into the oceans….

I am also very careful to turn off unnecessary electricity and I don’t leave taps running, its just become a habit - but then I see pictures of Tokyo at night and its acres of flourescent lights and I only see the futility of my efforts from an environmental perspective (certainly, I save money personally, but that was not the motive)

But doesn’t the reality that one person’s efforts are futile only serve to underline the severity of the need for global research, investigation and change? Rather than just using it as an excuse to tax people even more!

Sorry, that was just a last irresistable comment here! :joy: I will just go and spread my biocompost instead and wake up the neighbourhood with its delightful odour! :sunglasses:

196

One last, last, last comment - promise!

We may have adopted many technological innovations related to environmental issues - but I bet you haven’t adopted this one yet: :sunglasses:

coolstuff

https://coolstuff.fi/kultakannu

2 Likes
197

Lol - brilliant - I’ve just finished the gardening so…

Second thoughts, the neighbours are watching :slight_smile:

1 Like
198

I think I’d also need a funnel as an accessory! :blush:

199

On the contrary @anon46773462 - In a world where a 33 year old lad called Mark Zuccerberg (SP?) has the power to decide unilaterally, which classes of people (Group Identities) are to be supported and which other classes of people (Group Identities) are to be denied a voice and permanently excluded from any conversation - without even Governments having the integrity to raise a murmur of demur and also can simply refuse to bother to appear before Official enquiries, I think the voice of reason and experience, of someone who has some experience of life in less insane times is important.

The young ones today, do not have that experience. To tend towards a compromise which has served multiple generation well - Neither Marxism nor Naziism - democracy half way between the extremes is good. Freedom of speech - even if we do not like what the other side is saying - tends to allow both sides of the argument to be heard and a middle path to be chosen.

Sadly, on any of the current “issues” one only gets to hear the “Right side” of any discussion. Those on the side of establishing truth by discusiion and / or testing simply are excluded from the conversation.

In a world where

Is a perfectly sound piece of advice to offer a young man just about to embark on His own journey into western society, something is broken !

In a world where AI is just about to overtake the human brain at performing those “Inherrently human” types of operation, and likely to exterminate us or “meld” with us to form a “compound being” (Bionic man ?) within a couple of generations, and both sides in several long standing and vitriolic disputes around the world are full “Nuclear Powers”.

One has to wonder whether Mr Obama’s commitment to spending $100 Trillion (current prices - USA commitment alone) over the next century, with the possibility of delaying the “real temperature rise” by 0.16 deg C at the end of that period, is “sensible” or pure narcissism ? "Virtue Signalling " ?

1 Like
200

It is a big problem how to deal with these issues, if at all, and how much to commit to them that could alternatively be (better?) spent elsewhere!

But i think it is a question of evaluating the seriousness of the consequences if one chooses to ignore the warnings.

If someone knocks on my door and said “there’s a guy round the corner in a bulldozer saying he’s going to knock your house down” do i just say i want to see the proof first and just shut the door?

Here by the way, is more on that link i posted:
Nature crisis: ‘Shocking’ report details threat to species - Nature crisis: ‘Shocking’ report details threat to species - BBC News

1 Like
201

I think the first thing you need to so is assess whether the guy telling you this is Paranoid, full of Fly Agaric, or being PAID to tell you this ?

Then I don’t think it would be at all unreasonable to ask him to show you this supposed bulldozer ! :wink:

And perhaps ask him why 0.8 deg C over 140 years suddenly turns into a bulldozer ?

You gotta love the BBC mate - once upon a time - unbiased and serious news resource.

Interesting tho’ some of what this “Report says” we’ve been trying to bring to people’s attention since the late ‘60s. It’s changed a bit tho’ - Now it seems to be “Dogs” which are a threat to wildlife - well here in the UK Domestic Cats were traditionally the “Elephant in the room” - quite obviously the major problem , but not to be mentioned on fear of death !. The Wildlife and Coutryside Acts were a further huge destroyer of wild life by “protecting” Corvid species and DR Packham’s challenge to “Open licences” and Theresa May’s abject Capitulation last week, will probably see the end to all of the smaller species of birds within our borders. But advocate “control” of these out of control species and the Cat loving “Urban Greenies” will fall upon your neck, like so many predatory virusses.

Oh and of course the Obligatory “Global Warming” purely as a stand alone, because you lose marks if you write anything without blaming the excesses of “Global Warming” !

And at the end of this “Holier than thou” report, what was the recommend ?

“Political Action” :roll_eyes:

202

And comment from the Guardian on the same UN report:

203

Just shooting the messenger doesn’t make the issue go away. It is the report not the reporter that is to be heeded, i think?
And what has the last 140 years go to do with the next 50? As any trader will tell you, that is lagging data! :joy:

204

That’s interesting - “Paris” is supposed to “deliver” increase of 1.5 to 2.0 degrees according to that report - But that NASA chart shows 0.8 deg over the last 140 years.

And that interesting clip @Clint inserted (the one which says we need loads more CO2) shows what little effect CO2 has is on a Logarithmic scale, so it looks as though we can achieve “Paris” without any effort at all ! :grinning:

Panic over then ! :sunglasses:

205

That is just their “Models” mate “forecasts” which are made by the 31 or so “Models” - All of which Over-estimate the forecast ! (except ONE - which they steadfastly ignore)

Have you seen Al Gore’s “Inconvenient truth”?

Well worth the watch at around $3 on You tube I think last time I looked.

THAT is what the “Models” pop-up in conjuction with the “Hockey stick Chart”

AND That was shown to every School kid in America for many years as an “Educational tool”

Perhaps one of our US contributors can tell us whether it still is ?

206

And is that some kind of justification for dismissing every report, no matter how real the evidence, as just trickery and deception?

And will it be sufficient, as so often these days, if proven wrong, that all the doubters just say “sorry we didn’t take it seriously” when the natural world, together with the human race (which i do not consider part of the natural world and more) implodes upon itself with no way back?

That, indeed, is a typical characteristic of human behaviour! :joy:

207

Which report Have I dismissed here ? I don’t think it was that BBC one you linked to was it ?

When ? How ? - I recommendeded AL Gores film, which is clearly wrong for your perusal.

Sorry mate rather too Cryptic for me at this stage.

208

Exactly the point. It is not a BBC report at all. It was only reported by them. Read it to see who compiled it and what evidence of the human damage it contains.

How and when? Again, read it. Yesterday, today, tomorrow. It is all happening. One cannot see a landscape with eyes conveniently shut…

But there really is nothing to add here. One can cherry-pick whatever suits one’s purpose and opinions. All i can believe is that there is sufficient evidence to show that something major is going on and it is negative for our globe and it is largely if not totally the direct result of our neglect.
If that were not sinful enough, the even greater sin is to ignore it even when the evidence is laid out before us.

We can choose to ignore it because no one has proved it - or we can act on it even if it eventually turns out to have been wrong. I know which of those options i chose.

To be honest, most of the changes that environmentalists state as necessary are intrinsically good and positive for the future sustainability of the earth and its natural inhabitants regardless of whether there is a threat of environmental catastrophy or not. To be honest i do not understand why anyone would be against such actions for their own sakes and for that of future generations.

1 Like