|
|
Post by johnloony on Jan 8, 2024 0:39:06 GMT
So, ignoring the Roman Warm Period, when grapes were grown in England, ignores the Dinosaur Warm Period, when dinosaurs waded in tropic swamps in the British Isles and all that loverly coal was laid down by tropical forests. Apart from their warm period what have the Romans ever done for us? Aqueducts Viaducts Roads Latin lessons History books Kept the Eastern hordes at bay for a few hundred years Julius Caesar, by William Shakespeare |
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Jan 8, 2024 1:43:21 GMT
Reading University is having to find a new colour to represent the global rise in temperatures because currently Earth has been its scale. I think that tells us that current records being broken time after time is a problem worth worrying over Here's their climate stripe map covering nearly 300 years So, ignoring the Roman Warm Period, when grapes were grown in England, ignores the Dinosaur Warm Period, when dinosaurs waded in tropic swamps in the British Isles and all that loverly coal was laid down by tropical forests. Yes it is now warmer than the "mediaeval warm period" and of Roman times (which were regional features of western Europe not international anyway). It is probably warmer now in Britain than the "climatic optimum" of 5000 years ago. Generally it's not been as warm as this since the Pliocene, around 2.5 million years ago. The fact that the climate was warmer in the Cretaceous period 100 million years ago is relevant only to geologists. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 8, 2024 6:36:14 GMT
Skidmore has no conviction / principle other than enriching himself on the back of an ideology that will impoverish us all. He is already a paid shill for the eco industry, this just paves the way for him doing even more of that. The planet is warmer than it's ever been. It's about time someone did something about the fact we're facing a climate catastrophe. That statement is well beyond a ridiculous form of supra-alarmist hyperbole and into realms of utter garbage. Noone with even the slightest of grasp of recent climatological history could possibly have made it. |
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Jan 8, 2024 6:50:47 GMT
So, ignoring the Roman Warm Period, when grapes were grown in England, ignores the Dinosaur Warm Period, when dinosaurs waded in tropic swamps in the British Isles and all that loverly coal was laid down by tropical forests. Yes it is now warmer than the "mediaeval warm period" and of Roman times (which were regional features of western Europe not international anyway). It is probably warmer now in Britain than the "climatic optimum" of 5000 years ago. Generally it's not been as warm as this since the Pliocene, around 2.5 million years ago. The fact that the climate was warmer in the Cretaceous period 100 million years ago is relevant only to geologists. The consequences to humanity now are perhaps more devastating. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 8, 2024 6:54:11 GMT
The planet is warmer than it's ever been. It's about time someone did something about the fact we're facing a climate catastrophe.
None of that statement is true.
The planet is currently warming yes, but warmer than it's ever been, no, it's been much warmer in the past.
We are not facing a climate catastrophe, not for the climate of earth anyway. We are however in a period of time, when climate change may be problematical for some animals survival, but they are nearly as likely to overun by human urban sprawl which people don't seem to care so much about. Animal evolution will adapt anyway, whatever happens to individual species, it always does.
Does that mean we should stop polluting out atmosphere, well it does seem sensible. Does that mean the UK has to do it when major polluters don't, for me thats a no.
The Earth will survive, and eventually humans won't, that's evolution.
That sort of evidence-based common-sense truth is way out of fashion in an age where people can choose their gender from a pik-n'-mix and believe eight impossible things before breakfast. Emoting and tearful assertion is all the rage and sweeps all boards. |
|
|
|
Post by uthacalthing on Jan 8, 2024 7:33:14 GMT
Skidmore has no conviction / principle other than enriching himself on the back of an ideology that will impoverish us all. He is already a paid shill for the eco industry, this just paves the way for him doing even more of that. The planet is warmer than it's ever been. It's about time someone did something about the fact we're facing a climate catastrophe. More people die annually in Africa of the effects of cold than of the effects of heat. We are overdue another ice age. We are one decent volcanic eruption away from one |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 8, 2024 7:34:38 GMT
Reading University is having to find a new colour to represent the global rise in temperatures because currently Earth has been its scale. I think that tells us that current records being broken time after time is a problem worth worrying over Here's their climate stripe map covering nearly 300 years  So, ignoring the Roman Warm Period, when grapes were grown in England, ignores the Dinosaur Warm Period, when dinosaurs waded in tropic swamps in the British Isles and all that loverly coal was laid down by tropical forests. Don't bother J G these people 'know their own truth' and are way beyond evidence and reason in a la la land of their own devising. Its for the sake of the planet in'it? Will no one think of the children? Add your own gormless cliche-du-jour! |
|
|
|
Post by uthacalthing on Jan 8, 2024 7:36:40 GMT
I would enjoy a frost fair though. And a Bonspiel. And skating on the fens.
|
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 8, 2024 8:24:42 GMT
Yes it is now warmer than the "mediaeval warm period" and of Roman times (which were regional features of western Europe not international anyway). It is probably warmer now in Britain than the "climatic optimum" of 5000 years ago. Generally it's not been as warm as this since the Pliocene, around 2.5 million years ago. The fact that the climate was warmer in the Cretaceous period 100 million years ago is relevant only to geologists. The consequences to humanity now are perhaps more devastating. LOL x 10 million. |
|
|
|
Post by Defenestrated Fipplebox on Jan 8, 2024 8:28:42 GMT
So, ignoring the Roman Warm Period, when grapes were grown in England, ignores the Dinosaur Warm Period, when dinosaurs waded in tropic swamps in the British Isles and all that loverly coal was laid down by tropical forests. Yes it is now warmer than the "mediaeval warm period" and of Roman times (which were regional features of western Europe not international anyway). It is probably warmer now in Britain than the "climatic optimum" of 5000 years ago. Generally it's not been as warm as this since the Pliocene, around 2.5 million years ago. The fact that the climate was warmer in the Cretaceous period 100 million years ago is relevant only to geologists.
The fact that climate was warmer 100 million years ago is not just relevant to geologists. It's relevant to all when people post sensationalist inaccurate remarks like dok did, in my opinion.
I suspects my and your views are not too different on climate change, as I agree humans are stupid too pollute our atmosphere, that our opinions are just seperated by a few degrees.
|
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Jan 8, 2024 8:29:12 GMT
dok didn't qualify the statement at all, so since when is irrelevant.
Reading University is having to find a new colour to represent the global rise in temperatures because currently Earth has been its scale. I think that tells us that current records being broken time after time is a problem worth worrying over Here's their climate stripe map covering nearly 300 years What caused the great freeze in the 1600s? |
|
|
|
Post by Defenestrated Fipplebox on Jan 8, 2024 8:30:16 GMT
Yes it is now warmer than the "mediaeval warm period" and of Roman times (which were regional features of western Europe not international anyway). It is probably warmer now in Britain than the "climatic optimum" of 5000 years ago. Generally it's not been as warm as this since the Pliocene, around 2.5 million years ago. The fact that the climate was warmer in the Cretaceous period 100 million years ago is relevant only to geologists. The consequences to humanity now are perhaps more devastating.
Please explain how this is the case, and do you mean for individuals or for the species?
|
|
|
|
Post by Defenestrated Fipplebox on Jan 8, 2024 8:35:17 GMT
Reading University is having to find a new colour to represent the global rise in temperatures because currently Earth has been its scale. I think that tells us that current records being broken time after time is a problem worth worrying over Here's their climate stripe map covering nearly 300 years What caused the great freeze in the 1600s?
|
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Jan 8, 2024 8:43:47 GMT
Reading University is having to find a new colour to represent the global rise in temperatures because currently Earth has been its scale. I think that tells us that current records being broken time after time is a problem worth worrying over Here's their climate stripe map covering nearly 300 years What caused the great freeze in the 1600s? It is generally reckoned that there was a decline of 0.5 degrees on average in Britain during the "little ice age" lasting approximately from 1550 to 1850, with a peak in the late 1600s. That gives you a sense of scale. This was a regional feature, not a worldwide one. Palaeoclimatologists say that it was caused by a weakening of the North Atlantic conveyor, which takes warm salty water up to the East Greenland sea, where it sinks, coupled with a negative phase of the North Atlantic Oscillation, where the usual high pressure over the Azores, and low pressure over Iceland reverses. This weakens the jet stream and allows the insertion of arctic air into mid latitudes. There has been a long discussion about the impact of the Maunder Minimum (of sunspots), which would be a worldwide feature. This reduced insolation by a fraction of a percent. My reading suggests there is no consensus on how important this might have been, although the lack of any 'great freeze' in China or Argentina during the period, suggests to me not very much. Edit: daft ha'porth posted a reference at the same time as this, which conveys much the same message. Volcanic eruptions only have a temporary effect however, and it would require continuous volcanic activity at a higher level than previously to affect climate, and there is zero evidence that this was the case. A big volcanic eruption will however cause a cold spell for a couple of years, which can be, and was, totally disastrous to most people living on the edge of subsistence, and such episodes stick long in the collective memory. |
|
batman
Labour
Posts: 12,361 
Member is Online
|
Post by batman on Jan 8, 2024 8:51:00 GMT
Yes it is now warmer than the "mediaeval warm period" and of Roman times (which were regional features of western Europe not international anyway). It is probably warmer now in Britain than the "climatic optimum" of 5000 years ago. Generally it's not been as warm as this since the Pliocene, around 2.5 million years ago. The fact that the climate was warmer in the Cretaceous period 100 million years ago is relevant only to geologists.
The fact that climate was warmer 100 million years ago is not just relevant to geologists. It's relevant to all when people post sensationalist inaccurate remarks like dok did, in my opinion.
I suspects my and your views are not too different on climate change, as I agree humans are stupid too pollute our atmosphere, that our opinions are just seperated by a few degrees.
the question being whether that separation between your opinions can be kept to one & a half degrees or will rise to a potentially dangerous 3 degrees |
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Jan 8, 2024 9:40:40 GMT
I would enjoy a frost fair though. And a Bonspiel. And skating on the fens. this is what they took from you |
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Jan 8, 2024 9:54:20 GMT
Yes it is now warmer than the "mediaeval warm period" and of Roman times (which were regional features of western Europe not international anyway). It is probably warmer now in Britain than the "climatic optimum" of 5000 years ago. Generally it's not been as warm as this since the Pliocene, around 2.5 million years ago. The fact that the climate was warmer in the Cretaceous period 100 million years ago is relevant only to geologists. The consequences to humanity now are perhaps more devastating. This sort of rhetoric is why the green movement is so contentious. It's all a bit Chicken Licken. Every time I hear phrases like "climate emergency" I roll my eyes. And it makes me (and no doubt many others) take a more fatalistic view on climate - you can't expect to build any kind of movement for change by demoralising people and making them feel like they're powerless. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,889
|
Post by The Bishop on Jan 8, 2024 10:00:36 GMT
The consequences to humanity now are perhaps more devastating. This sort of rhetoric is why the green movement is so contentious. It's all a bit Chicken Licken. Every time I hear phrases like "climate emergency" I roll my eyes. And it makes me (and no doubt many others) take a more fatalistic view on climate - you can't expect to build any kind of movement for change by demoralising people and making them feel like they're powerless. I do sympathise a bit with this tbh, but its difficult isn't it. You do after all want to grab people's attention and convince them that something undesirable *is* happening, but we *can* do something about it. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Jan 8, 2024 10:18:47 GMT
None of that statement is true. The planet is currently warming yes, but warmer than it's ever been, no, it's been much warmer in the past.
We are not facing a climate catastrophe, not for the climate of earth anyway. We are however in a period of time, when climate change may be problematical for some animals survival, but they are nearly as likely to overun by human urban sprawl which people don't seem to care so much about. Animal evolution will adapt anyway, whatever happens to individual species, it always does. Does that mean we should stop polluting out atmosphere, well it does seem sensible. Does that mean the UK has to do it when major polluters don't, for me thats a no. The Earth will survive, and eventually humans won't, that's evolution.
That sort of evidence-based common-sense truth is way out of fashion in an age where people can choose their gender from a pik-n'-mix and believe eight impossible things before breakfast. Emoting and tearful assertion is all the rage and sweeps all boards. A quick perusal of this thread would show that all the evidence being presented is coming from one side of the argument. Would you wish to redress that balance, or are you not done with the emoting and tearful assertion? |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jan 8, 2024 10:22:32 GMT
This sort of rhetoric is why the green movement is so contentious. It's all a bit Chicken Licken. Every time I hear phrases like "climate emergency" I roll my eyes. And it makes me (and no doubt many others) take a more fatalistic view on climate - you can't expect to build any kind of movement for change by demoralising people and making them feel like they're powerless. I do sympathise a bit with this tbh, but its difficult isn't it. You do after all want to grab people's attention and convince them that something undesirable *is* happening, but we *can* do something about it. The bigger problem is that it's very difficult to get political leaders, whose careers depend on elections held once every five years at most, to take proper decisions about responding to changes which take place over centuries. In practical terms it makes next to no difference to anyone's lives if difficult decisions are put off until the next term. Hence the invention of artificial deadlines to force the decision into something on the scale of practical electoral cycles. If anyone wishes to highlight and object to the artificiality, they are under an ethical duty to suggest how else to ensure 'here today, gone tomorrow' politicians take decisions which only the people of the next century will see proper benefits. |
|
