England’s first ever red warning for extreme heat on Monday and Tuesday.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lither_1927

I don't doubt we are entering a warmer period in the cycle. The question is whether the warming is induced by man.

---

can you explain in your words what you think the evidence for it being man made is?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lither_1927

I don't doubt we are entering a warmer period in the cycle. The question is whether the warming is induced by man.

---

I'll summarise for you - yes it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

The answer is yes according to the experts.

---

The trouble with 'experts' is they know a significant percentage of folk will believe whatever the say because they're 'experts'. Hence they come up will anything that suits their narrative, safe in the knowledge they won't be challenged.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lither_1927

From the links you provided. It's not 99% of scientists but 99% of those funded to do peer reviewed papers.
Radio 4 today reported that the majority of scientists agree that climate change is man made. I wonder why they didn't use the 99%?

---

What do you mean funded to do peer reviewed papers? :hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Quiet Monkfish

The trouble with 'experts' is they know a significant percentage of folk will believe whatever the say because they're 'experts'. Hence they come up will anything that suits their narrative, safe in the knowledge they won't be challenged.

---

Challenge them then, what do you challenge them on?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Bloop

I'll summarise for you - yes it is.

---

There couldn’t be more proof of something.

If people don’t believe it they haven’t seen the evidence. It can all be found in the unedited form, completely unbiased.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Quiet Monkfish

The trouble with 'experts' is they know a significant percentage of folk will believe whatever the say because they're 'experts'. Hence they come up will anything that suits their narrative, safe in the knowledge they won't be challenged.

---

So these experts, and it seems there are a great many of them - what is it you believe they all have to gain by claiming global warming is a result of human actions if that isn’t the case?

This is something that puzzles me.

Attachment 5013

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Quiet Monkfish

The trouble with 'experts' is they know a significant percentage of folk will believe whatever the say because they're 'experts'. Hence they come up will anything that suits their narrative, safe in the knowledge they won't be challenged.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Quiet Monkfish

The trouble with 'experts' is they know a significant percentage of folk will believe whatever the say because they're 'experts'. Hence they come up will anything that suits their narrative, safe in the knowledge they won't be challenged.

---

The peer reviewed scientific papers appear in almost complete agreement. These are hardly people likely to be overawed by ‘experts’. It’s actually mostly the general public who appear to know better.

You’re weird.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

Attachment 5013

---

Who are they published by? Half on them weren’t even wrong ffs.


There is a reason the ozone isn’t gone, the reaction to it.

There’s a reason acid rain doesn’t exist in such large amounts, it’s because of the reaction to it.

The ice cans have massively reduced in size.

What’s funny is people will say it’s spread by the “main stream media” when you can always find the original sources used in their stories and check them yourself. ****ing donuts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

Attachment 5013

---

You do realise the o zone issue at that time was solved because people took it seriously and governments acted yeah?

All resulted in more taxes :hehe: how stupid do you have to be to read that and think “check mate!”

A while back someone on this board claimed that a collection of stars in the shape of a cross was evidence of God. If this screenshot has been provided as proof that climate change is not man-made, its just as ludicrous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doucas

You do realise the o zone issue at that time was solved because people took it seriously and governments acted yeah?

---

Of course ..don’t be so gullible, but for balance , I hardly thought “checkmate” when I read it.

We have been fed fear for years that’s for sure

Here another one from 1974 Attachment 5014

:hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

We have been fed fear for years that’s for sure

---

By who?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

can you explain in your words what you think the evidence for it being man made is?

---

Shouldn't there be a 'not' in there somewhere? :shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

Shouldn't there be a 'not' in there somewhere? :shrug:

---

Cloud seeding is fairly widespread these days

https://www.cloud-seeding-technologies.com/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

Cloud seeding is fairly widespread these days

https://www.cloud-seeding-technologies.com/

---

Another load of crap,why not do it over places that are in need of rain.
Are you a delivery driver,because i get him everyday on about chemtrails.

well it was forecast 38 C here, only hit 35 C, I feel a little disappointed to be honest, I wanted a " Tell my grandkids about when it hit 38 C in the summer of 22 "

Damm you Climate change, you have let me down

It hardly a load of crap and who mentioned chemtrails ?

Australian government documents here if you’re interested

https://www.aph.gov.au/parliamentary...port/chap7.pdf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

Cloud seeding is fairly widespread these days

https://www.cloud-seeding-technologies.com/

---

Sorry but I don't see the point of your post in regard to what I asked.
My comment to Rjk was because he asks the previous poster what he thinks the evidence is for it being man made when the previous poster was questioning whether it was.
So shirley the question should have been "can you explain in your words what you think the evidence for it not being man made is?
That is all.

Attachment 5015

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

It hardly a load of crap and who mentioned chemtrails ?

Australian government documents here if you’re interested

https://www.aph.gov.au/parliamentary...port/chap7.pdf

---

Becuase is all related in your post

Sorry but I don't see the point of your post in regard to what I asked.
My comment to Rjk was because he asks the previous poster what he thinks the evidence is for it being man made when the previous poster was questioning whether it was.
So shirley the question should have been "can you explain in your words what you think the evidence for it not being man made is?
That is all.[/QUOTE]

:thumbup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Citizen's Nephew

Attachment 5015

---

:hehe::hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Citizen's Nephew

Attachment 5015

---

:hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

Shouldn't there be a 'not' in there somewhere? :shrug:

---

I want him - if he can to summarize what he thinks the case for man made climate change is and why he isn't convinced by it.

I guarantee he hasn't understood the case for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

I want him - if he can to summarize what he thinks the case for man made climate change is and why he isn't convinced by it.

I guarantee he hasn't understood the case for it.

---

To be fir he probably didn't understand the question. :hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

Roads!

---

:thumbup::hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blue matt

well it was forecast 38 C here, only hit 35 C, I feel a little disappointed to be honest, I wanted a " Tell my grandkids about when it hit 38 C in the summer of 22 "

Damm you Climate change, you have let me down

---

To cheer you up Matt it was the hottest day on record in Wales today at 37.1 in Hawarden. The record might tumble again tomorrow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

So these experts, and it seems there are a great many of them - what is it you believe they all have to gain by claiming global warming is a result of human actions if that isn’t the case?

This is something that puzzles me.

---

You're clearly not aware how the system works. You act like these "experts" work for free in the name of truth seeking. These studies cost a lot of money to fund. So the truth belongs to those funding the study.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lither_1927

You're clearly not aware how the system works. You act like these "experts" work for free in the name of truth seeking. These studies cost a lot of money to fund. So the truth belongs to those funding the study.

---

I'm going to fund a study to see if humans can be born through the rectum. I would like to use you as a case study.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

Sorry Lither, i didn't quite catch your response.

You said to follow the money, so who is funding nearly all climate change research?

---

This is the third time I've asked the question in the thread to Lither. I'll ask again as you've brought it up again but not given this important information.

Who is funding all the peer reviewed climate research?

Maybe later we can ask "what do you think peer reviewed means", as I'm not convinced you're on the right track there either. But first, the funding?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

I'm going to fund a study to see if humans can talk through the rectum. I would like to use you as a case study.

---

FIFY

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Harry Paget Flashman

FIFY

---

Good fix.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

This is the third time I've asked the question in the thread to Lither. I'll ask again as you've brought it up again but not given this important information.

Who is funding all the peer reviewed climate research?

Maybe later we can ask "what do you think peer reviewed means", as I'm not convinced you're on the right track there either. But first, the funding?

---

In the States when climate alarmist Al Gore was vice president the cornerstone of Gore’s strategy was to ensure that all high-ranking government officials who had any involvement with funding policies relating to climate change were in line with his vision. These agencies included the Department of Energy, Environmental Protection Agency, National Science Foundation, Department of Education, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

You don’t even know what peer reviewed means mate.