400 Woke Scientists endorse mass civil disobedience to force climate action

I still think that anything significant we do at this time is premature because we absolutely do not have a firm grasp of how climate works and we don't have enough data to point us in a direction to actually do anything. Jumping into this stuff without clear and sure knowledge of the outcome is just asking for the next Ice Age to kick in sooner than later.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: continuousThunder
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

you've made a real valiant attempt to be clear and communicative here and it is appreciated.

unfortunately, no one on this site wants anything approaching a rational conversation.
I can only assume that deep down they're so terrified of the consequences of accepting reality that they can only treat any and all conversation about it with scorn. I've seen fear like that before.

The only thing I am close to “terrified” of is that some bureaucrat in Brussels will be raiding my wallet and having me eating soy burgers or insect protein.

So you have a phobia, an irrational fear that is all but in your mind, colour me shocked ...

It’s only irrational if there is no threat. There is clearly a threat from the left of delivering our sovereignty to foreign powers like the U.N. There are also plenty of idiots that want to control our diet...basically the entire Democratic field of Presidential candidates and their idiotic “green new deal”. Therefore, you are wrong once again.

a reply to: Metallicus

Paranoid much ?

originally posted by: Blue Shift
I still think that anything significant we do at this time is premature because we absolutely do not have a firm grasp of how climate works and we don't have enough data to point us in a direction to actually do anything. Jumping into this stuff without clear and sure knowledge of the outcome is just asking for the next Ice Age to kick in sooner than later.

I think the fact that co2 makes up only 4% of all greenhouse gases, water vapor makes up 95%, yet, for some reason, co2 is blamed for 100% of global warming, is enough reason to ignore all current climate alarmist predictions.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: Metallicus

Paranoid much ?

No, I am not as I just explained to you. Are you just obtuse?

a reply to: Metallicus

Yes I get it, the lefties scare you as does the rest off the world, you could maybe find a red state and build a big wall around it if that makes you feel better.

a reply to: ChefFox 400 puke clowns just like robots,not a thought in them,they don't research,they report and read scripts,just like any information given by said government,these are just more jerks distracting idiots

originally posted by: homerJ
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Our government is doing NOTHING about ANYTHING.

So investing billions in green tech such a solar, achieving a rapid rise in solar panels on homes, giving billions in drought relief, that doesn't exactly sound like nothing... here's a quote from a thread I wrote a few months back which I highly suggest you read to get a full understanding of my position on these topics:

The Liberals have done a lot to expand the use of green tech like solar and wind, the Australian Energy Update for 2017 shows a 18% increase in small scale solar power and a 4% drop in coal power in a year[12], and more recently they enacted laws forcing power companies to charge consumers less[13] due to the fast rising prices.

Dissecting the Global Warming and Energy Issues in Australia

Our pri minister is in hawaii sunning his god bothering backside while our country is on fire.
People don't realise the damage that this anti climate change rhetoric is doing to the rest of the efforts that logical ecologists and scientists are engaged in.

What exactly would you have him do, run around putting out the fires himself? I'm sure the people who deal with managing fires are not going to stop just because he's on holiday.

What is wrong with you people?? We had snow in November! Its been freezing cold in some parts yet there's massive fires and we're looking down the barrel of several 40 degree days where I live.

I'm not sure if you're aware of this but 40 degree days have always existed, some of the hottest days I remember where in the mid to high 40's when I was a kid, and we'd just sit in front of the fan all day because it was too hot to do anything else.

even if it's not because of climate change, these fires are still because of us. We own/control/manage/terraform this sunburnt country and like it or not, we are responsible for pretty much all of it.

Indeed, it is surprising how many of these fires have been reported as being purposely lit... it's almost as if some people are out there trying to prove a point by doing the most despicable thing they could possibly do. Also if you want to blame it on terraforming land our what ever, well Australia has a rather small population and our pace of development is actually very slow compared to most developed nations, some towns I regularly visit have barely changed since I was kid. Once again, if this argument was valid then climate change would be mostly impacting the nations with the most development and construction.

Being anti climate change has spilled completely into being anti environmental and we will all suffer because of it... THIS SUMMER MARK MY WORDS.

This is absolutely false, you're outright making assumptions and projecting your beliefs. I have lived in rural areas most of my life similar to you, I love this planet and the life on it more than I can easily put into words. I take every possible measure to avoid killing any sort of life, I even throw cockroaches outside rather than killing them. We will probably see some more large fires due to the drought but that doesn't automatically equate to proof of climate change as all these alarmists would have us believe.

anything remotely good for the planet that costs money is being poo pooed by you and your minions and nothing's getting done.

If you read my past threads on the topic of climate change and global warming you'll see this is yet another baseless assumption. I promote technology such as solar and hydro technology and situations where they make sense, and I heavily endorse nuclear technology because it's the cleanest form of energy generation we have while at the same time being cost effective and capable of powering an advanced modern civilization without constant black outs and brown outs. Solar panel manufacturing and disposal has been shown to produce around 200 - 300 times more hazardous waste than nuclear and it requires vastly more land, yet we have so called environmentalists using scare tactics to fight against nuclear technology in Australia, despite us having the most stable continent and the largest reserves of Uranium on Earth.

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder
Sorry to bump this thread but had to post this video from ABC News Australia. I'm always a bit surprised when ABC releases more balanced report like this. Apparently it takes something like 10 years before a solar panel will produce enough clean energy to offset the emissions created during its manufacturing, but we're seeing many low quality panels die as soon as 2 years after they were installed. And since we have no recycling system in Australia right now they just get dumped straight into land fills. It seems extremely likely that the solar panel boom in Australia has actually caused more pollution than it has offset due to low quality panels. Our government has also subsidized this process, essentially giving an advantage to the solar industry on the assumption it's good for the environment.

Good quality panels however probably can last long enough to reduce overall emissions, but without a proper recycling system I still don't see it as being very beneficial, and I would also ask if the average person is able to afford a high end solar system in the hopes it will last decade and eventually start saving them money once it pays for its self. That is a major reason many people opt for the cheaper systems and pay less qualified people to install it. As far as I can see right now, solar tech still needs to become better at producing energy at a lower price before it will become a truly cost effective solution, until them this idea that green tech costs less really is a form of propaganda.

As a couple of posters have already stated, we are in the early stages of a solar minimum, which is one variable that can bring about a global cooling trend. In fact, ice core data and sea sediment data clearly shows the cooling and warming phases our planet undergoes in natural cycles. Our current situation is, as stated, in early stages of a natural cooling trend, and but for our fossil fuel burning activities which has placed 300 years worth of 'extra' (on top of 'natural') CO2 into the atmosphere, we would be experiencing an uninterrupted downward cooling. Thing is, all that extra CO2 has impeded the natural cooling and 'extended' the period of moderate climate warmth, which is why the weather systems are sometimes chaotic, because extra heat in the atmosphere expresses itself as extra energy in the atmospheric systems.

Eventually, the weather system chaos will ease and the planet will settle into a deepening cooling, as all the natural celestial conditions are present for the planet's temperature to take a slight dive. Those celestial conditions are dynamic variables that all come together (as regular as clockwork) at certain periods, such as a solar minimum, the eccentricity of our planet, its obliqueness, the planet's orbit elongated into a longer ellipse, all combine to place our planet into a cooling period, and all are coming together now.

Our planet's natural climate phases can prove to be quite harmful for life forms, including our species. During a cooling trend, the march of ice growth south from the north would prove highly disruptive to our fragile societal structure, which is rather over-stating the obvious a little bit.

Think about experiencing a permanent uninterrupted polar vortex for many years, think how disruptive that will be? You will still have a summer, but it will be cold, bitterly cold, and in winter, total ice hell!. The question to ask is...how long will it go on for? Glacial periods tend to last for thousands of years, as do inter-glacial periods, but not as long as glacial ones. Real estate for growing crops shrinks down towards the equator, and that is only where crops are able to grow. Everyone will be on a deadly diet, whether we like it or not. Our input of CO2 has actually staved off the cooling, but it won't last, the cooling will eventually win the day, and when it does, moderate warm climates will deteriorate quite rapidly over a few years, and it is that speed of change that will hit us hard, especially here in the northern hemisphere.

originally posted by: Flatcoat
I think the fact that co2 makes up only 4% of all greenhouse gases, water vapor makes up 95%, yet, for some reason, co2 is blamed for 100% of global warming, is enough reason to ignore all current climate alarmist predictions.

It's unfortunate that the media has used the climate change scare to stir so many people up to do something (WE MUST ACT NOW!!!) long before we have the functional data to know what will happen if we actually do something.

Oh, well. Ice Age, here we come. At least we'll have green deserts for a little while before it all goes to hell.