Arctic ice melting at 'amazing' speed

[d000hg]

If the climate changes, so what? If it were going the other way into a natural ice age that would be bad news too. So simply the [alleged] fact that man is impacting the climate - why do we have to care about that?

[EternalOptimist]

thousands and thousands of experiments ? wow.

the alarmists have made thousands and thousands of predictions.


your task for today is to name one experiment that links man to climate change, and one prediction that has come true

[BlasterBates]

Climate change in 1940

[BlasterBates]

Climate change in 1932

[EternalOptimist]

the article linked by Owly says that the ice melt is 'unprecedented' then goes on to talk about the biggest melt in the last 1500 years.


so what caused the 'amazing' melt 1500 years ago ? co2 powered chariots ?

[IR35FanClub]

The words "climate change" is itself a cliche that is used to stir fear and most of us dissenters do not like to be manipulated in this way. We have always had and always will have "climate change" and it is not necessarily a bad thing.
Because we understand this and point it out we are regularly tarnished as "deniers"

It is this that drives controversy - the way that the so called problem is used to manipulate people (usually into parting with money)

It is not yet proven that the climate change is so bad it will cause any harm and it is not proven that man has caused it or that man can do anything about it.

I can't think of a better name than climate change. Other than "CO2 and Temperature Rise, leading to who knows what?"

I think denier is a good word - as in deniying something is happening means you are in denial. I think what most pro-AGW believers think is how can you not see the connection? It's is so frustrating to convince someone who seems to have switched off their ability to read and has bascially dug in and said "it' hasn't been proven" when that is utter BS. It has. What do you think thousands and thousands of scientific reports have said? Why is there a consensus amongst scientists with something like a probabilty of 0.8 to 0.95 meaning almost cetainly happening. It's the same proboability levels of saying an elctron will go down this wire if I apply a voltage.

Where the issues come frmo is in public opinion, politics and corporate greewashing. Large companies are successfully using underground means to make the mainstream look like the issue hsan't yet been successfully linked.

The only people who say it's not happening are journalists who get paid to write sensational articles that sell stories. They don't have to sell facts. I was invovled in a newspaper story the daily mail wrote. They rang someone to get a quote and they were told clearly - that what they were about to print was utter rubbish and given a 2 page email to explain. They still ran the original story and created the usual public uttereances and disgust with what "the government" were doing. I could go on and say journalist don't need to discolse their funding sources like polititicans do so can take back handers from any tom dick and harry when a little bit of news comes along from some "independent" research group (funded by gas and oil) find something a bit different. All they need to do is cause a bit of doubt in the publics mind about climate change - they have won. They can put off making serious chnges to energy infrastructure for another 20 years. I've met very few "skeptics" who are what I would call clued up skeptics, people like

What I will say to anyone one who thinks cliamte change is not happening, is go and read up on it. LOTS and LOTS of reading. Read the arguments that scientists have, not journalists, and you'll soon come to realised you've bee nhad by companies that have an interest in keeping the stauts quo.

Me - I can't wait to get an electric car, as long as it has 400bhp, 4wd, can do 400 miles. Not coz it green, but they will be better.
Likewise a house that generates its own energy will be great. Since I've been wathicng trend - solar panels systems have come down from about £18,000 in 2007 to as little as £4,500 now. They are about 18 months away from the point where over the life of the panels - the cost will be less than buying electric frmo the grid. Meaning you'll only need to use the grid as a backup in the winter. No units to buy frmo the utility company in summer. This is what they have been afraid of. But low prices will eventually mean there's nothing they can do and there will be a revolution like wqhat happned when mobile phones became cheaper and available on cotracts. My prediction is that 2016 will be the year when everyone you know seems to be installing solar PV.

This isn't government taxing us, or us spending more, it's us becoming independent for our energy instead of having a dependency on large global companies.

[IR35FanClub]

Climate change in 1932

Two news paper articles compared to this lot...
RealClimate: Index

Responses to common contrarian arguments would be a good place to start.

I can't believe I missed those. Gosh, I must have been wrong all along.

Really, is that the best that you can offer to prove cliamte change isn't happening?

[DodgyAgent]

I can't think of a better name than climate change. Other than "CO2 and Temperature Rise, leading to who knows what?"

I think denier is a good word - as in deniying something is happening means you are in denial. I think what most pro-AGW believers think is how can you not see the connection? It's is so frustrating to convince someone who seems to have switched off their ability to read and has bascially dug in and said "it' hasn't been proven" when that is utter BS. It has. What do you think thousands and thousands of scientific reports have said? Why is there a consensus amongst scientists with something like a probabilty of 0.8 to 0.95 meaning almost cetainly happening. It's the same proboability levels of saying an elctron will go down this wire if I apply a voltage.

Where the issues come frmo is in public opinion, politics and corporate greewashing. Large companies are successfully using underground means to make the mainstream look like the issue hsan't yet been successfully linked.

The only people who say it's not happening are journalists who get paid to write sensational articles that sell stories. They don't have to sell facts. I was invovled in a newspaper story the daily mail wrote. They rang someone to get a quote and they were told clearly - that what they were about to print was utter rubbish and given a 2 page email to explain. They still ran the original story and created the usual public uttereances and disgust with what "the government" were doing. I could go on and say journalist don't need to discolse their funding sources like polititicans do so can take back handers from any tom dick and harry when a little bit of news comes along from some "independent" research group (funded by gas and oil) find something a bit different. All they need to do is cause a bit of doubt in the publics mind about climate change - they have won. They can put off making serious chnges to energy infrastructure for another 20 years. I've met very few "skeptics" who are what I would call clued up skeptics, people like

What I will say to anyone one who thinks cliamte change is not happening, is go and read up on it. LOTS and LOTS of reading. Read the arguments that scientists have, not journalists, and you'll soon come to realised you've bee nhad by companies that have an interest in keeping the stauts quo.

Me - I can't wait to get an electric car, as long as it has 400bhp, 4wd, can do 400 miles. Not coz it green, but they will be better.
Likewise a house that generates its own energy will be great. Since I've been wathicng trend - solar panels systems have come down from about £18,000 in 2007 to as little as £4,500 now. They are about 18 months away from the point where over the life of the panels - the cost will be less than buying electric frmo the grid. Meaning you'll only need to use the grid as a backup in the winter. No units to buy frmo the utility company in summer. This is what they have been afraid of. But low prices will eventually mean there's nothing they can do and there will be a revolution like wqhat happned when mobile phones became cheaper and available on cotracts. My prediction is that 2016 will be the year when everyone you know seems to be installing solar PV.

This isn't government taxing us, or us spending more, it's us becoming independent for our energy instead of having a dependency on large global companies.

You are doing it again. I am not disputing that there is climate change I am disputing the degree that it is changing -is it a harmful change?-I am disputing whether it is man made enough to matter and whether man can do something to change it, and whether it is desirable for man to do so. I will also add that if journalists are disagreeing with you in order to sell more newspapers what then is Al Gore up to if it is not to enrich himself?

I also deeply distrust people who use sweeping cliches like "climate change" to make people think that something that is happening anyway underpins the credibility of what they say.

Furthermore the figures that are available are crammed into a very small number of years in the context of the life of the planet. We might find your hysterical attempts to brainwash us through fear a bit more credible if you could compare the figures to 5000 years ago.

[IR35FanClub]

And that's all I'll say on the subject . One thing I've found is that "deniers" don't want to belive so they say "prove it to me". and expect you to do all the work. I'm not a prophet, but have read enough to convince myself. E.g I could ask you to prove to me that your LCD screen is powered by electricty as as suitably difficult task.

I don't need you to believe me. To be honest it's all irrelevant what anyone thinks, becusae manufactureres of products have realised the public like things that use less energy as they are cheaper to run. E.g BMW, luxury car maker, has some of the lowest emmissions vehicles on the market. Fridges now use 1/3 of the electric they used to. Computers likewise. Bit by bit, it doesn't matter if I beleive or you believe, because energy efficinecy is getting better. (It's what drives economic growth - not energy consumption as originally thought).

Just like acid rain was turned around by using scrubbers on coal stack to remopve the sulphur, (which is why the german forests are still there) the ozone hole was plugged by banning aerosols, climate change will be reducedm maybe not quick enough, but then they'll come up with some geo engineering solutuions, like the company that has developed a way of using CO2 to make cement using the gas of powerstations. you can't get much more sequestered than that!

I just find it bizarre people want to take a point of view without having seemingly read up on their chosen point of view. And to think changing our ways means uneccesary cost, not and opportunity to reduce costs and drive innovation.

[d000hg]

If the climate changes, so what? If it were going the other way into a natural ice age that would be bad news too. So simply the [alleged] fact that man is impacting the climate - why do we have to care about that?

Still waiting on your answer 35. Change == bad, is that your position? If things were getting colder and it was making things difficult for the fluffy tigers, would it be OK to burn lots of things to prevent this?