Airborne_Again wrote:
Well, if you take as a given that the idea of global warming/climate change is a hoax perpetrated by the “Elite” then I suppose you have a valid argument. If, on the other hand, global warming/climate change is real, then your observation amounts to absolutely nothing (except possibly showing that the “Elite” doesn’t have a whole lot of foresight). So basically you have a circular argument.
The main argument in the “elite” issue is that they preach water and drink Veuve Cliquot by the gallon. That is something which obviously will make those who are supposed to practice austerity at their wish say very rightly "we are not that stupid. " People like that annoy me as well. Not because I am envious (I tried VC and did not particularly like it) but because LEADERSHIP goes by EXAMPLE. And that does not work at all with those people.
Global warming is one effect climate change can have. Over the millions of years this has happened regularly for various reasons. Currently we are in a warming cycle which however is accelerated by human waste production, namely CO2 and others. As we all know, scientists all over the world have one of the phases where they thrive on this and get billions of research money, the more so the more dramatic the predictions are. As those predictions concern time spans most of us won’t be alive to see, responsibility and verification is a major issue for this and as has been seen before (e.g. the “dying forests” debate in the 1980ties) are often deliberately exaggerated in order to be more research grant viable.
There is NO question in my mind that a global effort to do whatever is possible should be risen to change technology and human behavior in order to migate the human influence on climate. However this can very well be done for the benefit of society and the economy, and not via socialist inspired envy and austerity dreams. Just the opposite: Making electricity expensive will get more people to (illegally) heat with wood, just to give one example. Instead, people need to understand that technical change to benefit climate will benefit them as well.
The solar industry is a good example how this can work. It is thriving. Similarily, other industry branches could be thriving if the energy the environmentalist lobby uses in a destructive way would be finally pointed towards something positive. But instead of setting on drops of water to fill the ocean, the efforts need to be focussed on the major producers of CO2 and ways found to get those massive amounts reduced. Reforestation is a big deal there as well as undemonizing nuclear energy, which is climate neutral.
my prediction is that unless the green parties will finally reckognise that their union with socialism will cause the opposite of what they want and start partnering up with large technology to solve the problems they are bemoaning rather than asking people to return to the 18th century in their comfort level, efforts to slow down warming will go the same way Covid did: Doubters and consipracy theorists will take over and “rescue” the common man from the “elites”. How far that kind of thought has spread already should be very obvious. The last thing any of us needs are more conflicts and division. Austerity thinking and socialism however are extremely divisive lines of thought.
Coming to a city near you….
Michael_J wrote:
Coming to a city near you….
Two minutes of googling shows that this is a hoax. It has nothing to do with “climate” and is not a “lockdown” but rather a traffic congestion measure of the kind which has been commonplace in many cities for a very long time.
But facts don’t matter much anymore, do they?
Based on the facts, should Bill Gates or anybody else be worried about flooding their $43M house on the beach due to sea level rise?
Interesting graph, showing negligible acceleration over that time span, despite much steeper industrialisation.
Coming to a city near you….
While ago we went to Zermatt, we had to leave car outside the city
I understood that policy was around since 1960 !
Peter wrote:
Interesting graph, showing negligible acceleration over that time span, despite much steeper industrialisation.
Sure, if you feel that it is negligible with a rate during the last 20 years which is about 2,5 times greater than during the 113 years before that.
Ibra wrote:
While ago we went to Zermatt, we had to leave car outside the city
I understood that policy was around since 1960 !
The secret socialism was already in action at that time!!
The beach in front of Bill G’s house is exactly the same as it was 20 years ago. And it is exactly the same as when that row of houses was built many years before that.
It’s probably not the same as it was in 1870 as the area unlike now was a swamp at that time, where the San Dieguito river drains into the sea, despite sea level having risen by 22 cm in the 150 years since.
I think Bill can rest easy when considering the future of his $43 million dollar investment, especially when considering the ongoing population shift from cooler areas of the US to warmer areas like that where his house is located. He is by the way spending a great deal more on it to remodel completely, and annoying the neighbors quite a bit with the noise 
The great thing about graphs is that you can make a rod for your own back, by inviting people to choose the bit of it which they want to measure the slope on
So… what’s happened in the last 20 years?
What this tells me, as a hardware/software engineer, is that
ought to reverse the rise in sea levels!
Now, I don’t have a PhD; I am just a simple engineer. So can someone tell me where I am wrong? One liners don’t count.
Tongue in cheek of course, but the point is obvious: nobody has actually got a clue what is driving what.
