Extinction Rebellion versus brexit

[Heatwave]

Donald Trump has taken or is taking the US out of the Paris climate change accord. Doesn't that tell you all you need to know?

[Paul6754]

It's actually quite impressive mental gymnastics to disparage and attempt to nullify one dataset, that of literally hundreds of thousands of chartered institute accredited, professionally and academically qualified, peer reviewed researchers and scientists, all having passed serious review boards to earn their Phd and all having had their papers meticulously peer reviewed, criticised and held against the highest scientific method standard, and then on the other hand take the word of a tinfoil hat wearing youtube conspiracy theorist nutter as gospel.

 

Doha, With all due respect you don't know what you're talking about. Also, there are many quality articles in the literature/on Youtube that question the notion of global warming.

 

One could say that's actually ******* mental. So one will.

 

Think I might just side with Toyah, the doctorate holding university Professor of computational Chemistry with his thousands of paper citations, tbh.

 

One can say and side with whom one wants but my qualifications and experience in the field of molecular interactions and reactions stand comparison with anyone. Peer reviewed articles, inventor on granted patents and leading and managing PhD's/Postdocs from major Universities around the world, Oxbridge, Harvard, MIT,Stanford, Berkley, ETH etc in the research departments of major ethical pharmaceutical companies.

 

However, I wouldn't side with a University Professor whatever his qualifications who makes the statement below about the relationship between atmospheric CO2 and increased average temperature as it's not true and there's no evidence for it and to say there is a 100% correlation is very naive and poor for someone with such supposed knowledge.

 

Also, an important characteristic of any scientist worth his salt is to question the theories, question the dogma, a University Professor who's swallowed the man made CO2/Global Warming story hook line and sinker needs to take a look at himself and question whether he's in the right job.

 

 

Factually incorrect. The geological data shows a 100% correlation over a geological time scale of hundreds of millions of years between atmospheric CO2 levels and mean temperature. And the reason is also obvious, CO2 re-relflects infra red back to the surface of the earth.

 

Increased levels of atmospheric CO2 = increased average temperature is fact not opinion.

[Paul6754]

Donald Trump has taken or is taking the US out of the Paris climate change accord. Doesn't that tell you all you need to know?

 

For good reason because it's not true, questionable at best and it doesn't apply to China and India.

[philpvfc]

Paul, you need to get your head out of Trumps ass. Think of any reason to go against what is obviously true to suit own agenda. We are destroying this planet and despite progress being made we are being rolled back again with the attitudes shown like above and the obnoxious Trump and Michel Tener.

[Paul6754]

Paul, you need to get your head out of Trumps ass. Think of any reason to go against what is obviously true to suit own agenda. We are destroying this planet and despite progress being made we are being rolled back again with the attitudes shown like above and the obnoxious Trump and Michel Tener.

 

Phil that's a stupid comment to make and I won't lower myself to retaliate. Trump will have been advised by Climate Scientists in the USA to take the action he took.

 

I don't have an agenda on this topic but simply question the validity of the Global Warming dogma for the reasons I've given.

 

I guess you would have been all for murdering the first person who suggested the earth wasn't flat, read around the subject a little and don't listen to politicians about climate change.

[toyahw]

 

Ask yourself the simple question, how can a small molecular weight gas present in minute quantities have such a proposed massive effect

Well the miniscule amount of the even lower MW oxygen that dissolves in water makes a big difference if you are a fish. Thank you very much for casting aspersions on my professional credentials and competence. My employer, the University of Amsterdam, thankfully does not share your concerns.

 

 

By the way, you do not manage Ph.D. students, you supervise and then promote them as supervisor. HR do the management.

 

 

There is a debate to be had on this subject. But not the stick your fingers in your ears and hum type you are promoting. Why are you so rabid about it exactly? I'm just here to talk sense not go off on one and slag people off.

 

 

Maybe Rob would give us the opportunity to both write a blog on the subject? And let people judge for themselves.

[philpvfc]

Phil that's a stupid comment to make and I won't lower myself to retaliate. Trump will have been advised by Climate Scientists in the USA to take the action he took.

 

I don't have an agenda on this topic but simply question the validity of the Global Warming dogma for the reasons I've given.

 

I guess you would have been all for murdering the first person who suggested the earth wasn't flat, read around the subject a little and don't listen to politicians about climate change.

 

Trump does not care about the environment, he is 100% capitalistic, totally incentivised by making money and his country becoming wealthier at all costs.

You may believe him but outside America nobody is believing his bull but unfortunately apart from China maybe the US is doing more damage to the environment than anyone else.

[Santa]

There is a debate to be had on this subject.

Perhaps only to a certain extent. There are plenty of people who would be delighted to drag the subject into the realms of a subjective debate, so they can have their hokum validated as 'one side of the argument'.

[toyahw]

There is a debate to be had Santa. The scientists who have a vested interest in this have over outrageously over egged their pudding. Which paves the way for sceptics such as our mate above. Fact is we pump a **** load of Co2 into the atmosphere, is this a good plan? Not really

 

But China and India pump far more Co2 into the atmos. Basically what we do in the west is totally irrelevant in the scheme of things.

 

Not slagging off China and India, they are doing what we were doing. But with more people.

 

It is a conundrum. I admit. But pretending the problem does not exist is what does my head in.

[Paul6754]

Well the miniscule amount of the even lower MW oxygen that dissolves in water makes a big difference if you are a fish. Thank you very much for casting aspersions on my professional credentials and competence. My employer, the University of Amsterdam, thankfully does not share your concerns.

 

Of course it does and the sea makes a big difference to how much CO2 is in the air. Didn't do anything of the sort, just surprised at a seemingly closed mind from someone who works as a researcher at a University.

 

By the way, you do not manage Ph.D. students, you supervise and then promote them as supervisor. HR do the management.

 

Toyah, sad to say but that's just not true. An industrial research facility is totally different from a University and working in an Organic Chemistry Lab is totally different to modelling on a computer.

 

A PhD/Postdoc Organic Chemist straight from University joining the research department of a Pharmaceutical Company knows how to synthesize molecules but nothing about the drug discovery process, it's another multi-year learning process, what to do and how to do it and a newbie probably has never been part of a multi-disciplinary research team.

 

Hence new joiners need mentoring, training in the relevant skills and many new joiners will look for experienced scientists to learn from to accelerate their careers. HR don't manage anything scientifically, they usually don't know any science whatsoever. .

 

There is a debate to be had on this subject. But not the stick your fingers in your ears and hum type you are promoting. Why are you so rabid about it exactly? I'm just here to talk sense not go off on one and slag people off.

 

I don't have my fingers stuck in my ears and will change my mind if good evidence shows up. I like most other people have seen the information presented on tv and believed the narrative until I became aware of the Hockey Stick Graph and the antics of Michael Mann from UEA. I was appalled a scientist would manipulate data in this way and further digging showed he wasn't the only climate scientist to do so. Hence I became skeptical.

 

Since the politicians have got involved this whole caravan has blown up out of all proportion and stuff like carbon tax etc is being talked about and suggestions made that developing countries shouldn't use fossil fuels to generate electricity but should use much more expensive methods like solar/wind, in effect making it more difficult for these countries to move out of poverty. It is immoral and needs stopping.

 

IMHO Climate Science needs a completely new start as it's become difficult to tell fact from fiction, the parallel to Brexit is decisions are being made based on lies and untruths.

 

Maybe Rob would give us the opportunity to both write a blog on the subject? And let people judge for themselves.

 

Nice idea but I'm retired now and don't have access to the scientific literature and have other things to do. People will make up their own minds, particularly if they end up paying a carbon tax!!!

[Aussie Rules]

Of course it does and the sea makes a big difference to how much CO2 is in the air. Didn't do anything of the sort, just surprised at a seemingly closed mind from someone who works as a researcher at a University.

 

 

 

...Nice idea but I'm retired now and don't have access to the scientific literature and have other things to do. People will make up their own minds, particularly if they end up paying a carbon tax!!!

 

Paul, It is my thinking we believe what we want to believe, but when politicians call for a carbon tax I get a tad suspicious the 'climate change discussion' becomes nothing more than a great opportunity for the respective governments to rake in the cash.

[Paul6754]

Trump does not care about the environment, he is 100% capitalistic, totally incentivised by making money and his country becoming wealthier at all costs.

 

Phil, How do you know, have you spoken to him? America is built on capitalism and capitalism provides opportunity for everyone to better themselves. True he's standing up for America but not at all costs. What os wrong with putting your own country first.

 

You may believe him but outside America nobody is believing his bull but unfortunately apart from China maybe the US is doing more damage to the environment than anyone else.

 

I agree with two of his policies but strongly disagree on most others. So why was there a march in Europe recently (London/Germany?) in support of some of his policies.

 

All I can say is that when I drive around our town/Massachusetts in general the number of solar panels on roofs of houses is immense, the number of solar panel farms is huge, the number of wind turbines in the ocean off Mass are huge. The amount of research done in Universities in New England on all aspects of alternative methods to generate energy is mind boggling, stuff is often featured on a nightly tv program called "Chronicle" which explores living and working in New England.

 

We have all the same restrictions as in England on waste disposal, plastic bags, you name it so I don't accept that the US is doing more damage to the environment than "anyone else". It's a bigger country with a larger population so will produce more waste than the UK.

[Paul6754]

Paul, It is my thinking we believe what we want to believe, but when politicians call for a carbon tax I get a tad suspicious the 'climate change discussion' becomes nothing more than a great opportunity for the respective governments to rake in the cash.

 

AR, Yes I agree and also an opportunity for some politicians to make a name for themselves, Al Gore a prime example.

[Valiant62]

So the UN say this situation requires drastic action ( https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/statement/2018-10-08/statement-secretary-general-ipcc-special-report-global-warming-15-ºc ) what do thos who agree it’s serious thing needs to be done.

[philpvfc]

Phil, How do you know, have you spoken to him? America is built on capitalism and capitalism provides opportunity for everyone to better themselves. True he's standing up for America but not at all costs. What os wrong with putting your own country first.

 

 

 

I agree with two of his policies but strongly disagree on most others. So why was there a march in Europe recently (London/Germany?) in support of some of his policies.

 

All I can say is that when I drive around our town/Massachusetts in general the number of solar panels on roofs of houses is immense, the number of solar panel farms is huge, the number of wind turbines in the ocean off Mass are huge. The amount of research done in Universities in New England on all aspects of alternative methods to generate energy is mind boggling, stuff is often featured on a nightly tv program called "Chronicle" which explores living and working in New England.

 

We have all the same restrictions as in England on waste disposal, plastic bags, you name it so I don't accept that the US is doing more damage to the environment than "anyone else". It's a bigger country with a larger population so will produce more waste than the UK.

 

All very good but I bet not one policy to help the environment has been drawn up since Trump came in to power.

 

I don’t disagree with a lot of Trumps policies and he has certainly improved the US economy but he does not give a **** about the environment or anything that gets in the way of making America more wealthy.