[Politics] Schools 4 Climate Action - great turn out in Brighton

beorhthelm · Apr 18, 2019

Seagull27 said:
- we can see an unmistakeable correlation between that extra CO2 and a rise in global temperatures

have to say there is not an "unmistakable correlation", there is a broad trend correlation, CO2 raises near linearly while temp goes up, down, sideways for periods. raises an inconvenient question, what other factors are being overlooked or underplayed? as CO2 does not apparently rise directly in line with economic output, global GDP rising faster, how much reduction of GDP will we have to endure to reduce CO2 rise?

Seagull27 · Apr 18, 2019

dingodan said:
It isn't possible to know. I have a bachelor of science and the very first thing I was taught was that correlation and causation are not the same thing, and you cannot infer one from the other.

The planets climate is more complicated than that, and my original point remains. I have never said, nor would I say, that a changing climate shouldn't be a concern. I take issue with one thing, presenting as fact something which is not.

The fact that I am unwilling to draw the certain conclusions you are drawing doesn't mean that we aren't on the same page. Stop polluting the air, I agree. Stop felling the rainforests, I agree. Stop polluting our oceans, I agree. I wish every success to people who want to effect positive change in our relationship with our planet.

When people are willing to concede that we do not fully understand the complexity of the climate, and that all opinions on the matter, all scientific data, all considerations have value and should not be ignored. When people are willing to concede that we need to be practical and balanced in our approach and our perspective. When people are willing to concede that consenus != evidence, and dissenting from popular opinion doesn't make you a moron or evil, then, and only then, will we have a chance at bringing people together and working through possible courses of action and solutions.

The attempts to "unite" us with a fierce insistence on an unproven consensus actually divides us. Humility would do a better job.

I have a PhD in science (not that has any significance) and I learned that when you find a correlation and then you can understand the mechanism (with evidence) by which the causation happens, you generally accept it unless there emerges any evidence to the contrary. We have that - CO2 is a greenhouse gas, which we can prove with experimental evidence, thus validating what we think causes the correlation. There is no credible contrary ideas or theories, with any evidence, that can explain climate change since the Industrial Revolution.

Your argument about not being able to 100% know could be applied to literally anything. However if we did that, we wouldn't get anywhere with science, which is why we prove things beyond reasonable doubt and then act on the conclusions, unless better science comes along.

No scientist claims to know everything about climate change, and we certainly can't predict the precise outcomes. None of them claim that either. And scientists are taught to be open minded, to challenge theories and encouraged to come up with new ideas. But that doesn't mean they discard the science that is already there just because you can't prove it 100%.

But, ultimately, I'm glad you agree that we need to change the way we treat our environment. We can continue to argue the intricacies but the most important thing is we do something about it.

Sent from my SM-J530F using Tapatalk

The Clamp · Apr 18, 2019

Of course there is huge merit in questioning science. Question away. Most people have done so, and in questioning and looking at the evidence have come to the conclusion that man is having a catastrophic effect on the climate.

Seagull27 · Apr 18, 2019

beorhthelm said:
have to say there is not an "unmistakable correlation", there is a broad trend correlation, CO2 raises near linearly while temp goes up, down, sideways for periods. raises an inconvenient question, what other factors are being overlooked or underplayed? as CO2 does not apparently rise directly in line with economic output, global GDP rising faster, how much reduction of GDP will we have to endure to reduce CO2 rise?

It's the broad trend that is important though. The atmosphere changes a lot slower than temperature so doesn't experience the same level of short period variation. But those variations are small enough that they are not significant compared to the overall trend, it's referred to as 'noise'. Another example of this is temperature variations throughout the year. The temperature goes up and down each day. Sometimes there are days when it's warmer in November than October, but that doesn't mean that the overall trend towards winter being colder won't happen in December.

With regards to your question on GDP - I don't know, I'm not an economist. That's what the governments need to decide.

Simster · Apr 18, 2019

bashlsdir said:
Apart from putting out the recycling every fortnight, I really don't know what else people can and are expected to do.

There are loads of things you can do. You can take bags shopping, you can walk or cycle for most journeys under a mile, you can save electricity and water wherever possible etc etc

It seems to me that some people are very good at demanding others do what they want (make teachers responsible for their kids, make MPs implement an impossible Brexit etc), but not so good at doing their bit where they actually can.

So unless I'm missing your context or something, your post strikes me as absolutely feeble.

beorhthelm · Apr 18, 2019

Seagull27 said:
It's the broad trend that is important though.

it is important, and so is the variance, which may lead to poor policy based on a single cause. it isn't small variations, seasonal, its multiple years, decade blocks not following the correlation.

Seagull27 · Apr 18, 2019

beorhthelm said:
it is important, and so is the variance, which may lead to poor policy based on a single cause. it isn't small variations, seasonal, its multiple years, decade blocks not following the correlation.

But the broad correlation shows the same trend regardless of those short-term (in the grand scheme of things) cycles.

I remember seeing this infographic a few years ago and it really hits home how big an issue the rate of change is, regardless of other natural cycles.

https://xkcd.com/1732/

As it shows, we've had much higher temperatures in the past, but the rate of change has been slow enough for the planet to adjust over thousands of years. Since the industrial revolution, we've had a rate of change that is unprecedented. Anyone who reads this surely must share my concern

Sent from my SM-J530F using Tapatalk

portlock seagull · Apr 18, 2019

worthingseagull123 said:
It is not how it works. If people believed enough in cause there would be a majority embracing veganism, not taking foreign holidays etc.

You cannot force change and no government will want to upset voters.

Yes. Yes you can. Otherwise we carry on, all my life we’ve been warned about this and no one has really done anywhere near enough. Pointing out our problems with human nature as you’re doing - and stopping there - is a major part of the problem. Our politicians are pussies, they don’t act. We need real pressure. Because otherwise people just sit there moaning they’ve been inconvienced on route to work and that’s all; rather than understand why RE have done what they’ve done all week. If you’re such a person then you’re really just part of the problem in a nutshell. The same people moan about councils charging for business waste and decide the answer is to fly tip rather than pay and charge back to their customer. You can always counter a solution with individual needs and what about if’s...? That’s the scale of the problem. People always find a reason not to do. Which is why radical coach and horses charging through all that noise solutions are now needed alongside all the other good stuff people are all ready doing. That’s when we’re at our most innovative.

The Mid eighties was when discussions were being held and the public first became aware of terms like acid rain and green house effect. Very little has been done but argue since. Hence why action is needed. The approach is not a mass consultation. It’s drastic action designed to deliver results. If green energy costs more then up go our energy costs overnight until it becomes cheaper because of mass adoption and technology. Waiting for market forces and human apathy to provide change isn’t going to cut it any longer. The stupid and the selfish will never believe or procrastinate. Which is fine except they’re on the same ship as me and I don’t want it to sink. So they must be forced into doing their bit. It’s simply the only way. Democracy is a weak vessel in this respect. The required rate of action is more suited to dictatorships, hence the draconian martial law like steps I’d advocate. We’d all get used to equivalents of the black out pretty quick only this time the threat is far greater than Hitler. Enormous change is required, the line of which most people can’t comprehend so I don’t blame such types that are in denial. Hence why forced action by governments is the only effective way to make changes in the timescales now required of weee to literally reverse the tide.

Anyway, pointless debating ways of reaching a consensus and getting everyone on board. Not enough time. Need to just do. Now. Declare national emergency and get cracking. Lead the world. Again!

portlock seagull · Apr 18, 2019

dingodan said:
It isn't possible to know. I have a bachelor of science and the very first thing I was taught was that correlation and causation are not the same thing, and you cannot infer one from the other.

The planets climate is more complicated than that, and my original point remains. I have never said, nor would I say, that a changing climate shouldn't be a concern. I take issue with one thing, presenting as fact something which is not.

The fact that I am unwilling to draw the certain conclusions you are drawing doesn't mean that we aren't on the same page. Stop polluting the air, I agree. Stop felling the rainforests, I agree. Stop polluting our oceans, I agree. I wish every success to people who want to effect positive change in our relationship with our planet.

When people are willing to concede that we do not fully understand the complexity of the climate, and that all opinions on the matter, all scientific data, all considerations have value and should not be ignored. When people are willing to concede that we need to be practical and balanced in our approach and our perspective. When people are willing to concede that consenus != evidence, and dissenting from popular opinion doesn't make you a moron or evil, then, and only then, will we have a chance at bringing people together and working through possible courses of action and solutions.

The attempts to "unite" us with a fierce insistence on an unproven consensus actually divides us. Humility would do a better job.

So basically you want a nice cosy one to one with Sir David over a point of order that is pedantic in the extreme. Ridiculous in fact given the nature of the crisis here. You’re debating how big the hole is and whether an iceberg or other large object caused it whilst the ship sinks? As I said, if that’s what you’re concerned about, I’m all for kicking people into line with legislation and martial rule Sgt Major Style. Don’t have time for all this pussy footing around. We used it all up in the 80s,90s,00’s and 10’s. I’m not willing to let people use the 20s similarly. Nope. It’s a case of here’s your rifle, get yourself down in that slit trench and the enemy’s coming from over there...What? You’re a Cook? I don’t give a toss! You’re a soldier now. Start shooting. Ready Aim FIRE!

JC Footy Genius · Apr 18, 2019

portlock seagull said:
Yes. Yes you can. Otherwise we carry on, all my life we’ve been warned about this and no one has really done anywhere near enough. Pointing out our problems with human nature as you’re doing - and stopping there - is a major part of the problem. Our politicians are pussies, they don’t act. We need real pressure. Because otherwise people just sit there moaning they’ve been inconvienced on route to work and that’s all; rather than understand why RE have done what they’ve done all week. If you’re such a person then you’re really just part of the problem in a nutshell. The same people moan about councils charging for business waste and decide the answer is to fly tip rather than pay and charge back to their customer. You can always counter a solution with individual needs and what about if’s...? That’s the scale of the problem. People always find a reason not to do. Which is why radical coach and horses charging through all that noise solutions are now needed alongside all the other good stuff people are all ready doing. That’s when we’re at our most innovative.

The Mid eighties was when discussions were being held and the public first became aware of terms like acid rain and green house effect. Very little has been done but argue since. Hence why action is needed. The approach is not a mass consultation. It’s drastic action designed to deliver results. If green energy costs more then up go our energy costs overnight until it becomes cheaper because of mass adoption and technology. Waiting for market forces and human apathy to provide change isn’t going to cut it any longer. The stupid and the selfish will never believe or procrastinate. Which is fine except they’re on the same ship as me and I don’t want it to sink. So they must be forced into doing their bit. It’s simply the only way. Democracy is a weak vessel in this respect. The required rate of action is more suited to dictatorships, hence the draconian martial law like steps I’d advocate. We’d all get used to equivalents of the black out pretty quick only this time the threat is far greater than Hitler. Enormous change is required, the line of which most people can’t comprehend so I don’t blame such types that are in denial. Hence why forced action by governments is the only effective way to make changes in the timescales now required of weee to literally reverse the tide.

Anyway, pointless debating ways of reaching a consensus and getting everyone on board. Not enough time. Need to just do. Now. Declare national emergency and get cracking. Lead the world. Again!

Obviously you aren't being serious but even so ...

“The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it"

portlock seagull · Apr 18, 2019

JC Footy Genius said:
Obviously you aren't being serious but even so ...

“The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it"

I'd argue you're not being serious enough but hey, good to see Goodwin's law being used.

Iovan The Sweeper · Apr 18, 2019

Interesting points on this thread, and completely agree that small changes in behaviour amongst a huge group of people can make a difference (switching to a renewable energy provider, reducing what you buy and reusing / repairing, flying less / not at all, driving less / buying an electric car, not buying products with palm oil in, eating less meat etc). Over time, this could become normal behaviour.

But yes, real change needs to come from government and business - but again, that's where people can have influence. And big change can happen fairly quickly: half of new cars sold in Norway now are electric / hybrid, as grants have helped.

Is anyone optimistic? What can science do to help reduce carbon levels, and is it dangerous to rely on that?

BrickTamland · Apr 18, 2019

Iovan The Sweeper said:
Interesting points on this thread, and completely agree that small changes in behaviour amongst a huge group of people can make a difference (switching to a renewable energy provider, reducing what you buy and reusing / repairing, flying less / not at all, driving less / buying an electric car, not buying products with palm oil in, eating less meat etc). Over time, this could become normal behaviour.

But yes, real change needs to come from government and business - but again, that's where people can have influence. And big change can happen fairly quickly: half of new cars sold in Norway now are electric / hybrid, as grants have helped.

Is anyone optimistic? What can science do to help reduce carbon levels, and is it dangerous to rely on that?

They’ll be a point when the largest corporations (those whose changes would make a significant difference, and set trends) realise that a green focus is the profitable focus. The infinite potential of green and renewable energy will start to oust fossi fuels as the main profit maker. It’s sad saving the plantet isn’t a large enough motivating factor in of itself but I think there is some hope. It starts with the consumer though - we need to vote with our wallets when it comes to energy and food. Profit is tangible and should enact change.

worthingseagull123 · Apr 18, 2019

portlock seagull said:
Yes. Yes you can. Otherwise we carry on, all my life we’ve been warned about this and no one has really done anywhere near enough. Pointing out our problems with human nature as you’re doing - and stopping there - is a major part of the problem. Our politicians are pussies, they don’t act. We need real pressure. Because otherwise people just sit there moaning they’ve been inconvienced on route to work and that’s all; rather than understand why RE have done what they’ve done all week. If you’re such a person then you’re really just part of the problem in a nutshell. The same people moan about councils charging for business waste and decide the answer is to fly tip rather than pay and charge back to their customer. You can always counter a solution with individual needs and what about if’s...? That’s the scale of the problem. People always find a reason not to do. Which is why radical coach and horses charging through all that noise solutions are now needed alongside all the other good stuff people are all ready doing. That’s when we’re at our most innovative.

The Mid eighties was when discussions were being held and the public first became aware of terms like acid rain and green house effect. Very little has been done but argue since. Hence why action is needed. The approach is not a mass consultation. It’s drastic action designed to deliver results. If green energy costs more then up go our energy costs overnight until it becomes cheaper because of mass adoption and technology. Waiting for market forces and human apathy to provide change isn’t going to cut it any longer. The stupid and the selfish will never believe or procrastinate. Which is fine except they’re on the same ship as me and I don’t want it to sink. So they must be forced into doing their bit. It’s simply the only way. Democracy is a weak vessel in this respect. The required rate of action is more suited to dictatorships, hence the draconian martial law like steps I’d advocate. We’d all get used to equivalents of the black out pretty quick only this time the threat is far greater than Hitler. Enormous change is required, the line of which most people can’t comprehend so I don’t blame such types that are in denial. Hence why forced action by governments is the only effective way to make changes in the timescales now required of weee to literally reverse the tide.

Anyway, pointless debating ways of reaching a consensus and getting everyone on board. Not enough time. Need to just do. Now. Declare national emergency and get cracking. Lead the world. Again!

We wont have a green dictatorship in the UK.

There would be no support for it and too many would resist.

What sort of thing are you attracted to? Some sort of Khmer Rouge set up?

Those against the system would be eradicated?

BrickTamland · Apr 18, 2019

worthingseagull123 said:
We wont have a green dictatorship in the UK.

There would be no support for it and too many would resist.

What sort of thing are you attracted to? Some sort of Khmer Rouge set up?

Those against the system would be eradicated?

Such a silly comment and comparison. There wouldn’t be anyone against the system; that’s what the re-education camps are there for. Duh.

BLOCK F · Apr 18, 2019

portlock seagull said:
Yes. Yes you can. Otherwise we carry on, all my life we’ve been warned about this and no one has really done anywhere near enough. Pointing out our problems with human nature as you’re doing - and stopping there - is a major part of the problem. Our politicians are pussies, they don’t act. We need real pressure. Because otherwise people just sit there moaning they’ve been inconvienced on route to work and that’s all; rather than understand why RE have done what they’ve done all week. If you’re such a person then you’re really just part of the problem in a nutshell. The same people moan about councils charging for business waste and decide the answer is to fly tip rather than pay and charge back to their customer. You can always counter a solution with individual needs and what about if’s...? That’s the scale of the problem. People always find a reason not to do. Which is why radical coach and horses charging through all that noise solutions are now needed alongside all the other good stuff people are all ready doing. That’s when we’re at our most innovative.

The Mid eighties was when discussions were being held and the public first became aware of terms like acid rain and green house effect. Very little has been done but argue since. Hence why action is needed. The approach is not a mass consultation. It’s drastic action designed to deliver results. If green energy costs more then up go our energy costs overnight until it becomes cheaper because of mass adoption and technology. Waiting for market forces and human apathy to provide change isn’t going to cut it any longer. The stupid and the selfish will never believe or procrastinate. Which is fine except they’re on the same ship as me and I don’t want it to sink. So they must be forced into doing their bit. It’s simply the only way. Democracy is a weak vessel in this respect. The required rate of action is more suited to dictatorships, hence the draconian martial law like steps I’d advocate. We’d all get used to equivalents of the black out pretty quick only this time the threat is far greater than Hitler. Enormous change is required, the line of which most people can’t comprehend so I don’t blame such types that are in denial. Hence why forced action by governments is the only effective way to make changes in the timescales now required of weee to literally reverse the tide.

Anyway, pointless debating ways of reaching a consensus and getting everyone on board. Not enough time. Need to just do. Now. Declare national emergency and get cracking. Lead the world. Again!

You are either taking the piss or you are truly nuts.

worthingseagull123 · Apr 18, 2019

BLOCK F said:
You are either taking the piss or you are truly nuts.

Environmentalists are generally deluded with weird fantasies.

BLOCK F · Apr 18, 2019

worthingseagull123 said:
Environmentalists are generally deluded with weird fantasies.

I think those that are less fanatical are generally well meaning and often talk sense, but the extremists really are barking and often hypocritical, not practising what they preach.

portlock seagull · Apr 18, 2019

BLOCK F said:
You are either taking the piss or you are truly nuts.

Thanks for your intelligent contribution to this crisis. I’m sure if we all sit down and talk like we have done for 50 years we will find a solution by, what, 3000? But in case we all burn before then as predictions indicate....Let me ask, do you believe it’s a national emergency? If not, see you in hell. But If you do, then you should understand that - as with ww2, about the only near precedent - massive sacrifices must be made. Immediately. Almost beyond anything living generations can comprehend. I mean most people’s idea of emergency is going without their wi fi for a day. That’s how ridiculously out of touch we’ve become. It’s going to take a heck of a lot more and we need to start getting used to what we’ve become utterly, but unnecessarily, dependent upon. Like travelling hundreds of miles to watch a game of football for 90minutes on a fortnightly or more basis without anyone else in the car. We’ve got to challenge our way of thinking. Radically. Sneering and sniping from the sidelines is so depressing and sadly quite normal. So we must legislate. Can’t leave it to voluntary contributions. People are too weak and caught up in their everyday lives to take notice. Stick a donut in front of me and I’ll probably eat it. Don’t give me the option and I can’t. You get my drift, trying to keep stuff simple because there’s a lot of simple people out there some of whom might read NSC

soistes · Apr 18, 2019

BLOCK F said:
You are either taking the piss or you are truly nuts.

They are not mutually exclusive

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Politics] Schools 4 Climate Action - great turn out in Brighton

A. Virgo, Football Genius

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

"the man's an arse"

A. Virgo, Football Genius

Well-known member

Why? Why us?

Why? Why us?

Bringer of TRUTH

Why? Why us?

New member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Why? Why us?

Well-known member

Share this page