GLOBAL WARMING: the truth! (1 Viewer)

[turkish van]

Since I can't read that, just went on to the Focus website - that article doesn't seem to be in any of the 1998 editions, could you be more specific?

 

[James]

I have read a lot of this post and the one point I am pleased about is that there is a debate.
To listen to many people (especially politicians) YOU WOULD THINK IT WAS A DONE DEAL!
Lets not fall out and lets not defend our beliefs to the death. Read all you can and keep an open mind as this seems to be the only way forward. I remember reading a piece which I wil paraphrase here.

"People don't look at the facts and form a belief, they did that years ago. They look at their belief and fit in the facts."

Lets not fall into that trap.

James

 

[Moonshake]

Bitterntwisted - I think that the whole of the BBC2 Global Dimming documentary is on YouTube (assuming that this is the same thing):

Part 1 - The Discovery http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_N9Bg1fxoyk
Part 2 - More Evidence http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1y-_K8eqkkM
Part 3 - Project IndoEx http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6Qd-r_jzOc
Part 4 - The Effect on Monsoons http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YY6N1uZJyNo
Part 5 - The Point of No Return http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzttR7VvwlE

This was fascinating stuff when it was first shown.

 

[Moonshake]

Wait a second, you wanted the thread locked five posts ago.

 

[turkish van]

But hey: if it gets you where you want to be suggesting I'm a liar, then fine! Whatever floats your boat!

Calling you a liar floats my boat? I never did anything of the sort, and what can I say - it's quite obvious you are one on the ones on this thread who doesn't know me.

But ta for the article, I will read later.

 

[Andrew Whitehouse]

Wait a second, you wanted the thread locked five posts ago.

I think you'll find that TB isn't blessed with the certainty of youth.

 

[deborah4]

They might be 'passionate and well-informed about environmental issues' (sic) but many seem not to have a wider perspective.LOL!

I must say I agree with this observation entirely! Years ago, (as a teenager and in my early '20s!) I too was 'very passionate' about environmental issues/ GW - spent many years after that vigorously campaigning for 'green' agenda NGOs - I took this 'passion' into both the study of Environmental Law, in which my major Thesis dealt with all that had led upto the Kyoto Protocol and the likelyhood of it's effectiveness as an international instrument. I studied in depth the background to the Bruntland Report on Sustainable Development, the IPCC's tensions behind the first Report that led eventually to the FCCC 1992 (Rio) etc etc . I discovered the difference between naive 'idealism' and realistic goals in social/economic/political paradigms. I also discovered the nature of 'scientific' dynamics, hypothesis, theories and 'facts'. From this, I concluded the 'safest' approach was to take the Precautionary Principle both at a macro and micro level. During that time, I also became heavily envolved with developing Local Agenda 21 within the framework of both Green Party and Labour Party politics at a local level. Self-interests and passions raged constantly on all sides of the debate! I gave way to pragmatism, born of experience of the realities both of human nature and a wider understanding of cross cultural/political/environmental interests. What resulted was Realism. A realistic and balanced approach can acheive far more than the raw energy of 'passion' or 'idealism', it leads to more objective interpretation/presentation of events and 'facts' and more importantly prevents early 'burn out' in those who claim to be 'passionate'. My passion is as strong as ever, but has been chanelled into making both longterm and shortterm life choices which I believe, on the basis of taking the Precautionary approach, are far more constructive than endless debates. This includes not driving, not having children (would adopt if I really wanted them!), buying organic/fair trade products, not going on frequent foreign holidays, putting on more clothes rather than use central heating, buying secondhand products rather than newly manufactured ones etc etc. My choices and don't tell others to do the same but we do know enough about GW to at least ellicit a Precautionary response from everyone who claims to 'care' about the environment.

As a sidenote, it's interesting that the ones most 'defending' a passionate approach, are also the same ones defending their right to fly around the world, demonstrating their frequent car use to travel all over to go birding etc. I would have thought expedience alone in this debate, would have led them to taking a more sceptical view of GW on the grounds TB has sought to demonstrate. It's all hyperbole anyway, if you can't be bothered to change your own lifestyle.

 

[Jos Stratford]

it's interesting that the ones most 'defending' a passionate approach, are also the same ones defending their right to fly around the world, demonstrating their frequent car use to travel all over to go birding etc.

Well here you are going to have to educate me, what do you really find interesting in this point? Being a passionate environmentalist and car driver? Being a passionate environmentalist and someone who flies? Funny, don't see why being those means one can't counter the approach taken by Tranquilty Base, in which he elluded to a certain member perhaps being too young to have formed worthy opinions.

It's all hyperbole anyway, if you can't be bothered to change your own lifestyle.

Problem is Deborah, you actually know little about our lifestyles or what we have (or have not) changed.

 

[jpoyner]

Out of interest, where was your original quote from?

Graham

The quote was from here. Seems he changed his mind? But demonstrates well just how little we understand the workings of the sun if the world's leading experts still can't make up their minds one way or the other! There is little reliable accurate data pre 1978 for solar output, and even after that date there are significant gaps, due to probelms with research satellites.

J

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/07/18/wsun18.xml

 

[Moonshake]

The quote was from here. Seems he changed his mind? But demonstrates well just how little we understand the workings of the sun if the world's leading experts still can't make up their minds one way or the other!

It shows no such thing. All it shows is how selective the likes of the Telegraph are in reporting the facts.

Addendum: to be fair, this is rife across all the media and works in both directions. I think that this is the point that Wunsch thought he would be making when he agreed to take part in the programme originally.

 

[deborah4]

Well here you are going to have to educate me, what do you really find interesting in this point? Being a passionate environmentalist and car driver? Being a passionate environmentalist and someone who flies?

Neither, just the 'passion' with which it has been oft justified and defended in debates about CC on BF by the same people who have rigourously defended and justified their 'right' to extensive car or air travel use to pursue their enjoyment of the birding. Contrastingly, the passion demonstrated by 'youth' has been met with equally commendable comments on lifestyle choices.

Problem is Deborah, you actually know little about our lifestyles or what we have (or have not) changed.

Who's 'we'? I don't recall targetting you in any way, so interesting again, you chose to respond in this manner. It's True anyway, I don't know what changes people have made to their own private lives, can only go on what people post about their birding experiences on BF about their birding trips, days out etc. If one can not make 'lifestyle choices' when it comes to pursuing a hobby, I can't be blamed for thinking it doesn't bode too well for changes that might have to be made to more essential aspects of our lives. I'm as passionate about birding as the next person and is an important and integral aspect of my enjoyment of life but for me, takes place within the wider context of the 'natural' world and our relationship to it. As I said, I don't expect people to make the same choices as me. It's an individual thing at the end of the day. I just made some longterm choices based on what I believe is a Precautionary approach because I don't know all the 'facts' and the risks of not doing so, seemed to me to be so much greater than the inconveniences that result from these choices. The debate on this thread on both sides, to me, justifies that approach more than ever.

 

[deborah4]

The debate on this thread on both sides, to me, justifies that approach more than ever.

Perhaps we all need to take a philosophical approach too

''The ordinary man needs philosophy because the claims of pleasure tempt him to become a self-deceiver and to argue sophistically against what appear to be the harsh demand of morality''

Kant's Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals, Paton, Hutchinson 1948 p23

 

[Jos Stratford]

Who's 'we'? I don't recall targetting you in any way, so interesting again, you chose to respond in this manner.

Your sentence "if you can't be bothered to change your own lifestyle" ...in this I assume it to be 'you in general', likewise is the 'we'.

can only go on what people post about their birding experiences on BF about their birding trips, days out etc. If one can not make 'lifestyle choices' when it comes to pursuing a hobby, I can't be blamed for thinking it doesn't bode too well for changes that might have to be made to more essential aspects of our lives.

Funny, in general, reading the various threads on the forum, it makes me think that things actually bode well for the environment, but then carbon is not the biggest issue in the world for me.

I'm as passionate about birding as the next person and is an important and integral aspect of my enjoyment of life but for me, takes place within the wider context of the 'natural' world and our relationship to it.

And could you name one person on this forum that it doesn't?

I just made some longterm choices based on what I believe is a Precautionary approach because I don't know all the 'facts' and the risks of not doing so, seemed to me to be so much greater than the inconveniences that result from these choices.

I would venture to suggest, in general, those using cars and even flying are probably doing a lot more for the cause of conservation, in all its guises, than those who prefer to sit and procrastinate.






PS. What's the difference between a twitcher and a whinging carbonite?

 

[turkish van]

I would venture to suggest, in general, those using cars and even flying are probably doing a lot more for the cause of conservation, in all its guises, than those who prefer to sit and procrastinate.

That's some weird man-logic you've got there. Sitting and procrastinating may well achieve absolutely nothing, but at least that depressed person would cut down their energy/fuel use... I've a feeling that the majority of car users and flyers do very little for the cause of conservation, instead preferring to sit in a box, cut off from the world, to get from artificially lit building to artificially lit building. And back again.

 

[walwyn]

Durkin was a member of the weird far-right-masquerading-as-far-left cult the Revolutionary Communist Party, and that many of the people he featured favourably in the documentary were RCP members or writers for the RCP magazine Living Marxism, including the founder of the party, Frank Furedi, who was featured throughout the documentary as "Professor Frank Furedi, Kent University," without mentioning that he was in fact a professor of anthropology, rather than of any scientific discipline.

Oooh the RCP. Vannessa Redgraves old outfit I recall. used to be funded by North Korea. Didn't they have a bust up in the mid 1980s? A rather nasty bit of blood letting IIRC, cult of the leader, sexual impropriaty, where has all of Kim's money gone, etc, etc.

 

[deborah4]

PS. What's the difference between a twitcher and a whinging carbonite?

Well I don't do either with much passion so you tell me - I just make lifestyle decisions based on what I understand about Climate Change and the need for a Precautionary approach.

''I would venture to suggest, in general, those using cars and even flying are probably doing a lot more for the cause of conservation, in all its guises, than those who prefer to sit and procrastinate.''

Everyone who's doing anything 'good' or 'bad' is doing more than those who 'prefer to sit and procrastinate''

Actually, it's you who seems determined to take this off thread into some personally directed comments so I'm not biting, you may not care much for carbon output and it's relation to CC or the ways people (you, me, scientists, politicians, journalists, birders etc etc!!!) all are influenced by self-interests whatever they may be and it's a debate that probably needs to be aired if we are to move forward in any way.

Me... I'm out of here ... gonna sort out my recycling then take a long bike ride to do some birding.

 

[walwyn]

Didn't really make any sense at all to me - can only think that this is something to do with Durkin's alleged RCP connections and their wacky historical theories.

More than likely! The RCP were not known amongst the left as being particulary of this world., you'll need to examine the NK position on environmental issues.

 

[Moonshake]

Couldn't dig up any dirt about sex scandals, but an interesting quote on the RCP here from Wikipedia:

The RCP's ideology had evolved into something closely approaching libertarianism, coupled with a strong belief in human domination of nature. It opposed any and all restrictions on science, technology and business, taking pro-corporate stances on issues like genetic modification of food, banning of tobacco advertisements and global warming.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Communist_Party_(Furedi)

 

[turkish van]

Actually, it's you who seems determined to take this off thread into some personally directed comments so I'm not biting...

Really?

 

[Jos Stratford]

That's some weird man-logic you've got there. Sitting and procrastinating may well achieve absolutely nothing, but at least that depressed person would cut down their energy/fuel use...

And there lies the view of a carbonite, cutting down on energy use is not the only issue concerning the environment. If it is man-logic, then so be it, but I would say these outweigh the negatives of energy usage, in no particular order of importance...
a. conservation relies on getting people interested, getting them to see the environment increases the interest and the number of people interested. Hence RSPB schemes such as 'Aren't birds brilliant?', etc, plus visitor facilities on reserves. More interest = more funds for active conservation, more pressure for lobbying for actions, etc.
b. even twitching, surely the worst type of evil if we are classing by energy usage per bird seen, is positively beneficial (in my humble opinion) - not only is it one of the most active recruiters of young into birding, and probably most go on to join conservation bodies, etc, but also I am fairly sure they contribute more so than many who prefer to sit at home. How many twitches see large sums raised for projects relating to conservation.
c. physical conservation requires travel and energy consumption. On a personal level, sure I drive 1000 km a week, a fairly heavy energy outlay I suppose, but without that distance covered I would have no reserve, there would be no conservation work going on there. I do not think I am alone in this sort of activity.
d. portraying users of cars and those who fly as demons will not affect their behaviour massively, but it will turn them against you and environmental issues in general. You need public support or there is no environment (back to point a.)

I've a feeling that the majority of car users and flyers do very little for the cause of conservation, instead preferring to sit in a box, cut off from the world, to get from artificially lit building to artificially lit building. And back again.

I'm sure the majority don't, as I'm sure the majority of non-car drivers and non-flyers don't either, but on balance, I am also willing to bet which contribute more.