• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Global Warming & Climate Change: Humans' Reactions & Responses

Some interesting consequences of climate change.

More ancient monuments and historic ruins will be uncovered as extreme weather caused by climate change gets more frequent, an expert has said.

The remains of a shipwreck off the Abergele coast dating back 150 years was revealed by July's thunderstorms. It comes after a prehistoric forest and 200 archaeological sites were unearthed following extreme weather events.

Archaeologist Dr Paul Belford said "you'll see more and more of this" as the world warms up.

Experts have "tentatively identified" the recently-uncovered Abergele wreck as the 35-tonne wooden sloop Endeavour that sunk without trace in gales in October 1854.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-49413435
 
Posts specifically relating to Greta Thunberg (the newly famous Swedish ASD teen climate change activist) have been eliminated and / or moved to a new thread dedicated to her as the focal subject:

Greta Thunberg
https://forums.forteana.org/index.php?threads/greta-thunberg.66259/


Future posts addressing Greta Thunberg specifically should be directed to that thread.
 
Trump wasn't the first to suggest using nukes for climate modification.

AMERICA'S DECADES-OLD OBSESSION WITH NUKING HURRICANES (AND MORE)

... The truth, though, is that Donald Trump’s apparent brainstorm—as terrible an idea as it is—actually has a long history. Seventy years ago, it was at the forefront of American scientific thought. What makes Trump’s embrace of nuking hurricanes unique is that, broadly speaking, no policymaker has seriously considered it a good idea since the days that the 73-year-old president was wearing diapers. ...

In those heady early years of the atomic age, many scientists imagined a world where humans could routinely use nuclear weapons to cleave the earth and remake its climate. Decades before climate change became a major concern, one book, Almighty Atom: The Real Story of Atomic Energy, suggested using atomic weapons to melt the polar ice caps, gifting “the entire world a moister, warmer climate.” ..

Julian Huxley, brother of novelist Aldous Huxley and a renowned biologist who would become the founding director of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, was particularly enthusiastic. He suggested at one point that nuclear weapons could be used to flood the Sahara, allowing the arid landscape to “blossom.” He argued in favor of “atomic dynamite” for “landscaping the earth.” ...

On the other side of the burgeoning Cold War, the Soviet Union was no less enthusiastic about the geo-engineering possibilities of nuclear power and atomic weapons. In fact, the Stalin-era Soviet government was particularly enthused with the idea of hurrying climate change along for the possibilities of opening its frigid Siberian east to thriving agriculture and bringing subtropical crops to the shores of the Black Sea. In a 1956 book called Soviet Electric Power, Arkadii Borisovich Markin suggested that, “Atom explosions will cut new canyons through mountain ranges and will speedily create canals, reservoirs, and seas [and] carry out huge excavation jobs.” The author brushed aside the obvious concerns, assuming that science would soon “find a method of protection against the radiation.” Soviet scientists proposed how to dam the Bering Strait and use massive nuclear-powered pumps to heat the Arctic Ocean. ...

https://www.wired.com/story/nuking-hurricanes-polar-ice-caps-climate-change/
 
There's so much climate modification going on as it is that I don't think anyone as a real clue
as to whats really going on.
 
We could stop supporting their economies, but I suspect its mostly internal trade.

Or encourage them to change, but thats too tidy.

Anyway, we are too much in love with cheap tat
 
'Debunking Climate Change Myths'

Presently ambivalent, if others and myself still find the following to be compelling...

Bottom line - Why not?

 
Last edited:
climate-doom-timeline.jpg


maximus otter
 
Mph.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grey_Owl

Here is an environmental messenger for you.

Old timers remember him, including our Queen, and interestingly David and Richard Attenborough.

(His writing is well worth reading, but he is not exactly a reliable narrator, and as I said once, he is a Wendigo).
 
Climate change brings mosquitoes and Dengue.

KATHMANDU, Nepal — When mosquito season brought past dengue outbreaks to regions across the Asian tropics, Nepal hardly had to worry. The high-altitude Himalayan country was typically too chilly for the disease-carrying insects to live. But with climate change opening new paths for the viral disease, Nepal is now reeling from an unprecedented outbreak.

At least 9,000 people — from 65 of Nepal’s 77 districts — have been diagnosed with dengue since August, including six patients who have died, according to government health data.

“We have never had an outbreak like this before,” says Dr. Basu Dev Pandey, director of the Sukraraj Tropical and Infectious Diseases Hospital in the nation’s capital, Kathmandu. With dozens of people lined up for blood testing on September 26 at the nearby fever clinic, set up this year to handle the outbreak, Pandey continues: “People are afraid.”

https://www.sciencenews.org/article...tm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Latest_Headlines
 
Is India one of the worst polluters per capita though?

That's irrelevant.
It's down to national governments to determine policies and decide whether to build more high-polluting power stations or go down a more eco-friendly route.
It's therefore vastly more important for governments representing populations of billions to be "greener" than more sparsely populated states.
 
What climate crisis? You mean the coming ice age?
https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

At this stage, climate change denial is about as intellectually serious as flat-earthism.

The idea that the powers that be stand to make money off the green movement is also absurd: if it was a moneymaker, the world would already be significantly greener.
 
You can still make money off things that are useless. Healing crystals are profitable without making the world any healthier.
 
You can still make money off things that are useless. Healing crystals are profitable without making the world any healthier.

And homeopathic "remedies" (I.e. placebos) are still sold at Holland and Barrett
 
https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

At this stage, climate change denial is about as intellectually serious as flat-earthism.

The idea that the powers that be stand to make money off the green movement is also absurd: if it was a moneymaker, the world would already be significantly greener.

I never said anything about the PTB's. I don't deny climate change. I deny man-made climate change as the overriding factor. It's not a debate I'm prepared to enter on here though. Fact is, neither I nor anyone else knows what the climate will be doing in 25 years time. That is _knows_, not guesses.
 
Last night, Andrew Neil took Extinction Rebellion spokesman Zion Lights to task over her organisation’s alarmist claims and anti-scientific arguments.


Lights was taken to task over the Extinction Rebellion claim that “billions of people will die over the next few decades”, eventually admitting that what they were saying did not fall within the scientific mainstream and disclosing that “unfortunately alarmist language works.”

When Neil posed the reality that in order to achieve Extinction Rebellion’s six year target, all flying would have to come to an end; all cars would have to be confiscated; meat would have to be rationed by the state; and all gas boilers and cookers would have to be removed from every home; Lights did not deny it, merely responding with the platitudinous comparison “we put a man on the moon.”

https://order-order.com/2019/10/10/extinction-rebellion-finally-subjected-media-scrutiny/

maximus otter
 
For all the noise and fury the planet itself will have the last say. I honestly don't think this discussion serves any useful purpose. i'm the last one to shut down debate, but these kind of discussions require 10,000 words or none.
 
Last night, Andrew Neil took Extinction Rebellion spokesman Zion Lights to task over her organisation’s alarmist claims and anti-scientific arguments.


Lights was taken to task over the Extinction Rebellion claim that “billions of people will die over the next few decades”, eventually admitting that what they were saying did not fall within the scientific mainstream and disclosing that “unfortunately alarmist language works.”

When Neil posed the reality that in order to achieve Extinction Rebellion’s six year target, all flying would have to come to an end; all cars would have to be confiscated; meat would have to be rationed by the state; and all gas boilers and cookers would have to be removed from every home; Lights did not deny it, merely responding with the platitudinous comparison “we put a man on the moon.”

https://order-order.com/2019/10/10/extinction-rebellion-finally-subjected-media-scrutiny/

maximus otter
So... they just flat-out lied? What a surprise. Didn't see that one coming!
 
We need to stop the tat, our lives would be so much better for it.

Going to car boots, I see far too much soul destroying junk. (But worthwhile stuff too)

And to stop throwing away useful stuff. I find no end of good stuff checked out. Half my clothes these days.
 
Kondoru,

Sadly those sentiments (which I share) are not in fashion.

It may even become illegal to repair stuff in the future. You will be impeding the march of technology.

Mind you, if, like me, you have no intention to change your smartphone every year, the manufactures will make damn sure that it becomes incompatible wit the latest systems.
 
It's not about impeding technology it's about impeding profit.

I agree on not throwing out useful stuff, we live in an age of waste, most humans for most our species' existence had vanishingly few possessions compared to us. "It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything else, that prevents us from living freely and nobly" - Bertrand Russell.

Reduce, reuse, recycle: the trouble is there's not much money to be made from the first two of those and less to be made from the third than from churning out shit.
 
It's not about impeding technology it's about impeding profit.

I agree on not throwing out useful stuff, we live in an age of waste, most humans for most our species' existence had vanishingly few possessions compared to us. "It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything else, that prevents us from living freely and nobly" - Bertrand Russell.

Reduce, reuse, recycle: the trouble is there's not much money to be made from the first two of those and less to be made from the third than from churning out shit.
I will be happy with My nokia non-smart phone, my 1964 Rover and my 1998 Harley (basically designed in 1957)

Edit - just realised the Harley is 21 this month - Happy Birthday my Black Beauty :itslove::botp:
 
Last edited:
I will be happy with My nokia non-smart phone, my 1964 Rover and my 1998 Harley (basically designed in 1957)

Edit - just realised the Harley is 21 this month - Happy Birthday my Black Beauty :itslove::botp:

Nokia? I use two cups on a bit of string.

Second hand cups and string.
 
When Preston North End started to rebuilt the stadium, stand by stand, the architect Ben Casey insisted that they used the original turnstiles. This they have done, they were built in the 1920's from iron with British engineering. The architect and others basically said that they were so well made, it is nearly impossible to make something of such good quality now. They still work like a charm.
 
..it is nearly impossible to make something of such good quality now. ..

That is one of those 'don't make them like they used to do' sayings.

I respond 'Bollocks',

We can, but for most of the time there is no need to. All that belongs to the days of 'wages five bob a week and beer at a penny a pint'.

INT21.
 
Back
Top