What struck me rigid, and explained it all quite simply was that we are still in an ice age - a recognised by science - Ice Age, so we can expect temperatures to rise (please excuse my ignorance)
The climate is changing as it always has done. There's no question about that.
To be honest Ross, my education was lacking (it still is) when it comes to climate change - I havre a vague understooding of the science that surrounds this topic, energy altering when in a specific atmosphere...but.
I don't have a clue about still being in an ice age.To be honest Ross, my education was lacking (it still is) when it comes to climate change - I havre a vague understooding of the science that surrounds this topic, energy altering when in a specific atmosphere...but.
The awareness that we are still in an ice age didn't enter my equation. That was the Penny that dropped.
I was never quite capable, unless it was blatant, of discerning falsehoods.
No, it's a new film.
As @Mythopoeika pointed out, it's an updating of the earlier "Swindle" documentary which, although winning awards, had to be released in an edited form, due to one of the scientists complaining that his views had been misrepresented.
Sometimes though you have to watch the guard dog in case it bites back without reason.
When you say "follow the money", I'm confused. Because the money has always been with (and still mostly is with) the companies who make money with oil and coal, petrochemicals, plastics, and other extractive industries or other companies that rely on those industries. Such industries have been suppressing the data for global warming using the same successful techniques that allowed tobacco companies to suppress the health effects of smoking.
It's not just about feeling uncomfortable about it, it's knowing that making these changes could lead to billions of people dying.
They've only used the last 200 years of climate data.
I'm not following. How will food instability, loss of water resources, mass migration, higher rates and spread of tropical diseases, and more extreme weather events lead to fewer people dying?
The models are just that. Models. They are not facts. That the planet is warming is a fact. The cause is in question.
As a youth who was impressed with the Sunday Times article on the future as an ice age in the seventies - largely by the illustrations as well as the ‘facts’, I’ve kept my eye on things and nothing in this video is a surprising revelation. Common sense dictates that putting thermometers on airfields is useful in detecting a runway tarmac melt point but is unrealistic in terms of calculating average of temperature. Rural thermometers are now urban thanks to town and city expansion and are less reliable than the original intent. Common sense would back this up. A counter culture pressure is always going to be directed at government but also impotent rage is aimed at inconveniencing the life of Joe Soap. I’m not talking from a time’s arrow point of view here. I’ve seen the same thing in student demonstrations and their cardboard coffins and skull masks on Ban the Bomb demonstrations. I can guarantee many of those students are living quite nicely as managers turning a blind eye to environmental issues right now as Cash is King.
So, you don't understand what models are either? The cause isn't in question. It's a rise in greenhouse gases. Full stop. That creates other effects. Sorry but you're just not adding to your credibility here by saying you don't understand it, but you understand it IS this reason...
But it isn’t science here. It’s the censorship of those who risk career suicide by saying the ‘wrong thing’.
Exactly.
Yes, censoring contrary views goes against the scientific method.
Says who? A small contingent of people who have opinions. So what?
Have you watched the video? There is evidence. Plus, there’s a ton of money to be made on a Study of Albino Mice Learning Pronouns - and Climate Change. That’s how funding works apparently.
The scientific method is not a step-by-step process. No one is censoring views. Obviously, you are telling me how much of these ideas are out there. Part of scientific norms is critique. A bad argument is (probably) going to eventually fail.
I started to. But I value my time. If I went down every rabbit hole of unconventional ideas I'd not have a useful life (or a sound mind).
Food instability? Here in the West, governments everywhere are trying to stop farming, in the name of the green agenda. They are trying to starve us into submission. If they'd only stop, everything would be just fine.
Except that it does seem that dissenting voices are not being heard.
So much for research. Ironically posted on the Fortean Forum.
No I didn't watch the video. Have you read the climate change reports?
What Google University? Science via YouTube?
Models are not proof. The cause of CO2 levels increasing is not proven.
