Safe Speed Forums

I didn't even notice Moonblat on the programme.... I must have just filtered him out. Some of it was very good but I did get the feeling there were a lot of things being avoided. I drifted off in the later bits so it could have said anything!

It would have been more helpful to say it's getting warmer, we don't know why but here's how to deal with adverse consequences rather than arguing over just the causation. There are too many vested interests on both sides to get a rational argument anyway.

I thought some of the satellite data actually showed a cooling not a warming over recent years? The difference in the last few years is that air quality has been improving and there has been a crack down on particulates. The horizon about global dimming might have something in it as dust also affects cloud formation which is something the climate models seemed to have a lot of trouble with.

The pdf called Understanding common climate claims I read linked from environspin watch http://greenspin.blogspot.com/ is a good read about a lot of the hype.

I freely admit to not understanding this subject particularly well so bear with me here...

You say "There are too many vested interests on both sides to get a rational argument anyway. "

I think I can make a good stab at the vested interests in favour of doing nothing and maintaining the current status quo but what are the vested interests in trying to reduce CO2 emissions?

Some argue that climate change researchers could jeapardise their funding if they come up with a null result. I'm not convinced by this, though of course healthy scepticism is an essential part of scientific inquiry.
Incidentally, I don't believe the tree ring studies dodged the solar activity question - that was part of the study. The solar flux was inferred from carbon 14 concentrations in the tree rings. Didn't see the beeb programme so don't know how they treated it.

I've heard of completely the OPPOSITE happening in the good ole' US of A! Some scientist was on radio 4 a few months ago telling how his research grants had been withdrawn shortly after publising a paper that (shall we say) didn't quite endorese the Bush administration's official line on global warming!

There are vested interests on both sides. Lots of greenies are into socialist agendas and want people to return to living in the dark ages with only freedom of movement for the well off ie them. Climate change is yet another doom-mongering bandwagon for them to jump upon. Imagine how little government control there would need to be without all the fear mongering about climate change, terrorism or whatever the daily mail is upset about this week.

I personally think it is better to plough lots of the money into making sure third world countries can cope with climate change rather than just spending money on reducing our emissions which may or may not do anything. China, India etc are going to be putting out far more CO2 per head than they ever have done as they slowly industrialise.

The beeb programme didn't mention that much about solar flux. There is the sun spot cycle, the magnetic field cycle, the orbit around the sun and the tilt cycle which all work together to affect climate on the earth. It is one hell of a chaotic system! I don't remember any mention of mars' polar ice caps melting either. There are no humans on there to blame....

Since private car ownership and the type of cars we drive ALWAYS seem to come under scrutiny (even though they produce a fraction of the worlds Co2)

# Anti-car, pro public transport groups
# Universities looking for research grants
# Governments wanting looking excuses to raise taxes
# Wind power manufacturers

Co2 has become BIG business, especially now there is "carbon trading" going on . There are a lot of people and a lot of business making a lot of money out of the Co2 issue

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

So would I be right in thinking that the vested interests In favour of maintaining the status quo FAR outnumber those in favour of reducing CO2 emissions?

Come on now...

where have all the 'lefties' gone? no more CND, Hatton, Scargill etc disappeared, greenham common ladies vanished or have they.

Look at the ruling elite we have at the moment...blair, brown, straw etc etc and on the continent similar characters now during their college days they were full on card carrying millitants, communists, Trots etc etc they just learned from the failings of Foot et al!!

Boil down the CO issue and the possible solutions spouted by the green professionals, smaller cars, more tax etc. Nuclear power is discounted by Jonathon Porrit!!! The nuclear issue is where they show their true colours.

The Red flag may have been taken down but believe me the 'Green agenda' flies from the same mast!

Yes, and that includes you and I.
A conservative estimate for the cost of implementing the Kyoto protocol - which, incidentally, isn't going to do much, or anything, whichever side of the fence you're on - is that it's going to cost every working person in the developed world in excess of £100,000.
That means, it's going to cost you personally over a hundred grand. And me as well. And, probably, your children as well.
Are you happy to pay out that sort of money for what is, in all probability, pie-in-the-sky? Because you're going to - and so am I.

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

The UK will fail to meet its targets, like many others and so will be "fined".

Is everybody happy we are going to throw money away for the sake of it.

Kyoto is cobblers and it is not just the USA that has said so. Most people that "support" it don't even know what it is...

Another piece of bullsh*t is that the USA is not working to reduce Co2. The have some of the toughtest anti-polution laws in the world. They will achieve greater reductions in C02 than many of the areas signed up to Kyoto.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

Its all cobblers!!!!

global warming is now called climate change....just incase some parts of the world get colder!!!!

My daffs aren't out yet and its mid march for gods sake!!

I even heared some politician/commentator or whatever she was saying that something must be done look at the earthquake in pakistan!!!!

Local environment yes of course, make sure our rivers are clean and we have cleaner air in our citys etc but the whole climate change agenda is a politically driven one. It looks like suceeding where lenin failed! Its perfect....somethign must be done....think of the children......how will we know if we've been successful? think of the children!

will our children be thanking us when we gave up our prosperity and they're making trainers for india?

There's some excellent stuff on the ABD website- go have a look.

To summarise the words of brilliant scientists into very simple terms, they say:
Yes, there is climate change, but this is down to the Sun. It happens in cycles, a cool period followed by a warm period, then another cool period etc. This is normal, and historic.
Yes, at the moment there is an increase of CO2, but only .6% of this is due to ALL the world's vehicles. The rest is natural, linked to the Sun's activities.
The eco-lobby has been hijacked by the ultra-left, who want to remove private transport altogether from their egalitarian utopia.
The government (here and abroad) are using ecology as an excuse to hammer the motorist for every penny they can.

Knew the tabloid claimed lots of things -but isn't this going a bit far

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

While I certainly think there are those on the left who inflate fear unreasonably about how bad the situation is (such as the earthquake example), it is ridiculous to claim that all the world's scientists say that global warming is cobblers. The vast majority of scientists that I have read about or heard about say that it is real, albeit to a much lesser extent than Greenpeace claims. Of course science isn't a democracy and a majority doesn't prove anyhting in itself, but I think it's important to at least get this right.

I was listening to an interesting Podcast the other day about global warming. There was a scientist on, and he was saying that it is an issue that so polarizes people he finds almost everyone he talks to treats him as an arch-enemy if he disagrees with them even slightly. He said the extreme left see him as a stooge of the oil compaines if he dares to suggest the world will not be destroyed in 50 years, and the right see him as a lentil-munching hippie if he dares to suggest that man made CO2 might have cause a 1 degree temperature rise in 100 years (which sounds like a fair claim). Something to think about.

We live in a world shaped by the changes in climate from the warm and temperate times of the dinosaurs through long cold ice ages and back again countless times.

The only constant is change.

Is mankind affecting the climate? Probably but in a tiny and almost immeasurable way alongside that of natural causes such as solar output and volcanic activity.

I am not saying we can’t make things nicer for us i.e. cleaner air and water with a bit of care but stop climate change? Not a chance.


The climate will change FACT

Mankind can not change it one way or the other FACT (think we could stop an ice age if we tried?)

Change is the natural state for are planet. What we really should be doing is planning and predicting these changes so we can best survive and thrive just as mankind have done so since the first ape started to walk upright and call itself man.


I would also like to share a little piece of information that’s some times forgotten when the greens start ranting on about little green things getting lost for ever due to climate change. 99% of all the species of plants and animals ever to walk, fly, swim or just sit there looking pity on the planet earth are extinct and have been since before mankind even existed.

Humbling when you realise just how unimportant we all really are in the grand scheme of things.

and

Are you suffering from a bit of a 1960s commie paranoia hangover or what?!

It's easy to paint those who you disagree with or who challenge the status quo as 'extremists'. And yes, there are extremists - on both sides - but that says nothing about who is right or wrong. Some would paint many users of this forum as extremists for challenging the status quo on speed cameras. And I'm not talking about Francis Rossi and co, although they do have a lot to answer for.


Well I think I'm an environmentalist - and I work in the nuclear industry! An 'all of the above' solution is likely to be technically the best, but with only a finite pot of money to spend on our 'energy toolbox', it may depend on which options give you the most bang for your buck. Nuclear doesn't always do too well in this respect, but it depends on the energy market.


Where on earth did you get that from? Do I detect Bjorn Llomberg's invisible hand? We could meet our Kyoto targets many times over simply by improving energy efficiency and cutting out wastage. Please explain how that will cost me £100,000.

Jeez, I don't have £100,000 to spare so I really hope Pete's wrong on that. Still, I don't doubt that it will and is costing nations a shedload of money. But since even its supporters concede that it won't actually have any effect on temperature measauble by the vast majority of the world's thermometers you have to ask what's the point in meeting the targets, however easy or hard that may be and whatever the cost. A difference that makes no difference is no difference.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

A conservative estimate for the cost of Kyoto is £70 trillion. And no, I've never read anything by Lomberg.
I find it amazing that people seem to think, "Well, it's big industry and the energy companies who are the big 'polluters', so they have to pay" - never dreaming that it's they who end up paying for it. Big industry etc are in it to make money, and if their input costs increase then they're going to pass the costs on, ultimately, to the consumer. And, because they're in the business of making money, they keep efficiency high and waste to a minimum. If they can save one hundredth of a penny in the manufacturing costs of a thousand pound item, they will.
It's already showing in things like the sharp rise in gas prices, etc - not to mention the extra tax that the Chancer is about to announce.

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

I'd have thought it's going to quietly snuff it before the costs get that high. Last I heard the number of nations on target can be counted on the fingers of one elbow. Which, if true, makes the cost so far doubly wasteful.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein