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

[Citizen's Nephew]

**** me it’s embarrassing how little you understand this.

You're wasting your time mate. Kudos for trying but seriously, in this heat, watch your blood pressure. I have to.

Side Note: White Castle Vineyard based in Abergavenny has received two silver awards at the 2022 International Wine Challenge - one for its Sparkling white wine vintage 2018 and one for vintage 2019 Pinot Noir précoce reserve. What have the Romans ever done for us?

[Lither_1927]

Crop shortages, wild fires, rising sea levels, massive population displacement. All already happening.

Like I said if you want to talk with such conviction with just the most base understanding of a subject go for it. But there’s plenty of unbiased data and journals you can look at it you were generally interested in educating yourself.

We've always had crop shortages, look at the 1930s dust bowl in America's Mid West. Sea Levels have always risen and fallen, always had wild fires. massive population displacement? From American wars maybe? And Soros funded NGOs encouraging migrants to come to Europe. You wrote an academic paper on climate change? What mark did you get?

[Lither_1927]

You're wasting your time mate. Kudos for trying but seriously, in this heat, watch your blood pressure. I have to.

Side Note: White Castle Vineyard based in Abergavenny has received two silver awards at the 2022 International Wine Challenge - one for its Sparkling white wine vintage 2018 and one for vintage 2019 Pinot Noir précoce reserve. What have the Romans ever done for us?

Lol

[Eric the Half a Bee]

We've always had crop shortages, look at the 1930s dust bowl in America's Mid West. Sea Levels have always risen and fallen, always had wild fires. massive population displacement? From American wars maybe? And Soros funded NGOs encouraging migrants to come to Europe. You wrote an academic paper on climate change? What mark did you get?

And despite all of the above, you still turned out to be a clueless mong.

[Lither_1927]

And despite all of the above, you still turned out to be a clueless mong.

What did i say that is incorrect?

[A Quiet Monkfish]

A thesis? How very Marxist of you.

To those on here who don't believe in science have a read and see if you understand the complications of this. Some said here my language was too extreme, I'd argue it was nowhere near extreme enough. We are in big trouble no matter how much you want to bury your head in the sand.

https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/humani...s-and-animals/

You're mixing up pollution and climate change old chum. One's very real but conveniently ignored by governments and main media, the other is a geo-political phenonomen, encourage by the like of China.

[rudy gestede]

You're mixing up pollution and climate change old chum. One's very real but conveniently ignored by governments and main media, the other is a geo-political phenonomen, encourage by the like of China.

Since the start of the industrial revolution the earth’s temperature has increased exponentially above and beyond the averages throughout the whole of history.

Which part of that do you think is a geopolitical phenomenon?

I suppose it isn’t even worth discussing with someone who has ridiculous opinions on covid too. It seems like you just get your opinions out of thin air to support whatever narrative you want.

[JamesWales]

It's absolutely right that all science is questioned - that is a necessity to keep science moving forward, but we also have a responsibility to follow the findings and take them seriously, especially when nearly all of it points in one direction.

I do agree there can sometimes be a degree of alarmism, but the debate for me isn't about whether climate change is largely man made (it is), it's how we deal with it in a socially sustainable way.

[rudy gestede]

It’s right it’s questioned by people who know what they’re talking about. This whole thread is questioning facts with stuff that’s been answered a million times before.

It’s the same old challenges that have been brought up and answered 1000s of times as long as I can remember. It’s even been the same people who are raising the same incorrect points they raised last time this discussion happened.

They’re not willing to understand if or do actual reading into it they just want to bury their head in the sand and use incorrect reasoning to make themselves feel either better or above everyone else.

More access than ever to genuine info yet people would rather watch YouTube videos and use confirmation bias to back up their “opinions”

I might as well start questioning gravity and the composition of the air we breath if science is meant to be questioned in this way.

[lardy]

It's absolutely right that all science is questioned - that is a necessity to keep science moving forward, but we also have a responsibility to follow the findings and take them seriously, especially when nearly all of it points in one direction.

I do agree there can sometimes be a degree of alarmism, but the debate for me isn't about whether climate change is largely man made (it is), it's how we deal with it in a socially sustainable way.

Science should be challenged, but in a scientific way - not the "I reckons" approach.

[chrisp_1927]

It's quite clear Bob. Because the earth may be warming up slightly over a very very very short period of time means very little in the bigger picture. 140 year old records alone are not evidence of man made global warming. Bit pointless citing said records. The earth has been, on average, something like 15⁰ warmer than the 2021 average during certain periods in the past.

Even if global warming is all bollocks. The suggested mitigations include things like burning less coal, oil and gas and planting more trees. Surely these are beneficial anyway. Strip away the science, surely you can see that we have f*cked up large parts of the world, surely it's worth cleaning up industry and rewilding as much of the earth as possible. Any climate impacts can just be seen as a positive side effect.

[lardy]

So if you include scientists who produce work that has not been verified by anyone else, the number is lower than 99%?


And yes, I'd be interested to know who you think is funding almost every single peer review - it's not oil companies, it's not gas companies, it's not governments, as it's not in their best interests. Where did you end up when you followed the money?

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

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

[North Cardiff Blue]

And despite all of the above, you still turned out to be a clueless mong.

Eric he's being a knob, but you shouldn't be using that term.

[JamesWales]

It’s right it’s questioned by people who know what they’re talking about. This whole thread is questioning facts with stuff that’s been answered a million times before.

It’s the same old challenges that have been brought up and answered 1000s of times as long as I can remember. It’s even been the same people who are raising the same incorrect points they raised last time this discussion happened.

They’re not willing to understand if or do actual reading into it they just want to bury their head in the sand and use incorrect reasoning to make themselves feel either better or above everyone else.

More access than ever to genuine info yet people would rather watch YouTube videos and use confirmation bias to back up their “opinions”

I might as well start questioning gravity and the composition of the air we breath if science is meant to be questioned in this way.

That's the nature of the internet unfortunately. There is a truth for everyone out there if you look hard enough..

[Gofer Blue]

Even if global warming is all bollocks. The suggested mitigations include things like burning less coal, oil and gas and planting more trees. Surely these are beneficial anyway. Strip away the science, surely you can see that we have f*cked up large parts of the world, surely it's worth cleaning up industry and rewilding as much of the earth as possible. Any climate impacts can just be seen as a positive side effect.

Exactly.

[xsnaggle]

You're wasting your time mate. Kudos for trying but seriously, in this heat, watch your blood pressure. I have to.

Side Note: White Castle Vineyard based in Abergavenny has received two silver awards at the 2022 International Wine Challenge - one for its Sparkling white wine vintage 2018 and one for vintage 2019 Pinot Noir précoce reserve. What have the Romans ever done for us?

Roads!

[JamesWales]

It’s right it’s questioned by people who know what they’re talking about. This whole thread is questioning facts with stuff that’s been answered a million times before.

It’s the same old challenges that have been brought up and answered 1000s of times as long as I can remember. It’s even been the same people who are raising the same incorrect points they raised last time this discussion happened.

They’re not willing to understand if or do actual reading into it they just want to bury their head in the sand and use incorrect reasoning to make themselves feel either better or above everyone else.

More access than ever to genuine info yet people would rather watch YouTube videos and use confirmation bias to back up their “opinions”

I might as well start questioning gravity and the composition of the air we breath if science is meant to be questioned in this way.

That's the nature of the internet unfortunately. There is a truth for everyone out there if you look hard enough..

One thing I would say; the attempts to shut down debate aren't always successful or relevent.

For example, the coal mine in Cumbria that supplies a neaby steel mill, that has been in the news in the last couple of years. My understanding is that without the coal mine, then coal is imported at a much greater environmental (and monetary) cost. The ultimate alternative being that the steel mill moves to China and uses Chinese coal - again, at a much greater environmental (and social) cost.

There are debates to be had around the edges of the issue that don't question the fundemental science but are nuanced and sometimes it does feel as if these kind of important debates aren't allowed by some - I mean the Extinction Rebellion types, who label any alternative opinion as unfathomable. I don't think thats helpful.

You have to take people with you ultimately, and unfortunately there are some very closed minds on both sides.

As for those who question all the science, well sometimes it's best to just say they are entitled to their opinion and move on.

[chrisp_1927]

That's the nature of the internet unfortunately. There is a truth for everyone out there if you look hard enough..

One thing I would say; the attempts to shut down debate aren't always successful or relevent.

For example, the coal mine in Cumbria that supplies a neaby steel mill, that has been in the news in the last couple of years. My understanding is that without the coal mine, then coal is imported at a much greater environmental (and monetary) cost. The ultimate alternative being that the steel mill moves to China and uses Chinese coal - again, at a much greater environmental (and social) cost.

There are debates to be had around the edges of the issue that don't question the fundemental science but are nuanced and sometimes it does feel as if these kind of important debates aren't allowed by some - I mean the Extinction Rebellion types, who label any alternative opinion as unfathomable. I don't think thats helpful.

You have to take people with you ultimately, and unfortunately there are some very closed minds on both sides.

As for those who question all the science, well sometimes it's best to just say they are entitled to their opinion and move on.

Agree with you about the Cumbria coal mine. Steel making seems like it's going to be one of the hardest areas to clean up. If we are going to need the coal them we may aswell mine it ourselves. Personally I'd like to see all the tax money paid by the mine to be ring-fence and spent on clean energy and carbon reduction projects.

[blue matt]

One thing I would say; the attempts to shut down debate aren't always successful or relevent.

We have some experts on doing that, difference of opinion automatically means they are right and you are wrong and the default for some on here when they appear to be losing the argument is ad hominem attacks

[lardy]

That's the nature of the internet unfortunately. There is a truth for everyone out there if you look hard enough..

One thing I would say; the attempts to shut down debate aren't always successful or relevent.

For example, the coal mine in Cumbria that supplies a neaby steel mill, that has been in the news in the last couple of years. My understanding is that without the coal mine, then coal is imported at a much greater environmental (and monetary) cost. The ultimate alternative being that the steel mill moves to China and uses Chinese coal - again, at a much greater environmental (and social) cost.

There are debates to be had around the edges of the issue that don't question the fundemental science but are nuanced and sometimes it does feel as if these kind of important debates aren't allowed by some - I mean the Extinction Rebellion types, who label any alternative opinion as unfathomable. I don't think thats helpful.

You have to take people with you ultimately, and unfortunately there are some very closed minds on both sides.

As for those who question all the science, well sometimes it's best to just say they are entitled to their opinion and move on.

I'm not sure that's the type of nuanced debate that happens here. There's none of that in this thread.

It's more the "if 99% of scientists say it's real, that's because they're being paid to say it". Why should anyone just move on from that and leave it unchallenged? I don't see how that's best.

[rudy gestede]

We have some experts on doing that, difference of opinion automatically means they are right and you are wrong and the default for some on here when they appear to be losing the argument is ad hominem attacks

But in this case people are saying things that are completely wrong. Like I said if I started a thread saying gravity isn’t real I’d expect it to be pointed out that I’m ignoring all the evidence.

The whole both sides of the debate thing that’s been spread through the media is stupid. You don’t need both sides on every topic where one side is coming from a place of complete bollocks.

[rudy gestede]

I'm not sure that's the type of nuanced debate that happens here. There's none of that in this thread.

It's more the "if 99% of scientists say it's real, that's because they're being paid to say it". Why should anyone just move on from that and leave it unchallenged? I don't see how that's best.

Exactly it’s a disingenuous argument. Debate should be encouraged on every topic is bollocks especially when one side is fed by malicious “evidence” trying to stop progress.

I don’t want to listen to someone saying climate change isn’t real because the earth’s temperature has always changed any more than I want to hear someone say the earth must be flat otherwise why aren’t all balls constantly rolling.

[JamesWales]

I'm not sure that's the type of nuanced debate that happens here. There's none of that in this thread.

It's more the "if 99% of scientists say it's real, that's because they're being paid to say it". Why should anyone just move on from that and leave it unchallenged? I don't see how that's best.

Yeah I agree. I have no time for the conspiracy theories on it - present the evidence at least.

But there are some unhelpful opinions associated with the climate debate on the 'green' side too, which probably fuels a bit of it all by not understanding some of the more legitimate nuanced issues or how some of what they propose will effect peoples lives.

The politics and hypocrisy of it all can grate too.

[rudy gestede]

But we are discussing it being real and the facts supporting it here.

What unhelpful opinions have been presented in this thread?

Again it’s pointless disingenuous “both sides” bollocks

The actual problem is things like covid and climate change become needlessly politicised. The solutions may be political but the facts associated with it aren’t yet the useful idiots you can see in this thread parrot the idiotic “evidence” because they want to bury their heads in the sand.

[JamesWales]

But we are discussing it being real and the facts supporting it here.

What unhelpful opinions have been presented in this thread?

Again it’s pointless disingenuous “both sides” bollocks

The actual problem is things like covid and climate change become needlessly politicised. The solutions may be political but the facts associated with it aren’t yet the useful idiots you can see in this thread parrot the idiotic “evidence” because they want to bury their heads in the sand.

I'm not talking about the thread as such - I agree with you on that. I'm just saying, there has to be scope to criticise the science, there is nuance around the edges, and there is a rather extreme wing to some of the green agenda. Recognising that probably reduces the instances of people questioning the broader issue.