The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > An Indian view of climate change, and where it led me > Comments

An Indian view of climate change, and where it led me : Comments

By Don Aitkin, published 12/8/2019

The IPCC summarises: estimates of global annual economic losses for an additional temperature increase of 2°C are between 0.2 and 2.0 per cent of income.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All
Dear Galen,

It is disappointing to see someone still trotting out the kinds of figures you have just tossed our way about CO2.

This is the salient one;

We have gone from well under 320 ppm of atmospheric CO2 to well over 400 since 1960. There is nobody of repute saying this is not been caused by anything other than human activity.

For you to call anyone deluded for not accepting these figures is the height of hubris along with a decent dash of self incrimination.
Posted by SteeleRedux, Tuesday, 13 August 2019 4:22:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I have never been convinced that CO2 driven global warming was the
answer. There were just too many questions about such a process.
One of the most significant to me was that the records show that first
the temperature rises then later the CO2 rises ! Not the other way about !
I was never able to get a satisfactory answer to that.
Then there was all the figures and it just seemed unreasonable to
expect such a small amount of CO2 to have such a large affect.

Then all the hurricane figures etc showed decreasing numbers instead
of the increasing numbers we were told had arrived.
It was all too flakey to put much trust in AGW.
Then the "We'll all be dead in 12 years" topped it off.

Now we seem to have a reasonable hypothisus that blames the sun and
cosmic rays and a control theory that matches history.
EG Roman times, the Middle Ages warming. The 15th century economic
boost and the Maunder Minimum.
If it is correct, we will be entering a cooling period.
Pay attention school teachers, you might have a long climb down.
Posted by Bazz, Tuesday, 13 August 2019 4:27:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Bazz,

Well because you have at least couched your post as a query I'm happy to attempt to provide an answer.

When you say; “One of the most significant to me was that the records show that first the temperature rises then later the CO2 rises! “ but why wouldn't they?

It is accept science that increases in CO2 lagged increasing temperatures after ice ages in the past. The rising temperatures were driven largely by solar cycles and the CO2 increases added about 30% to that warming.

This is the first time CO2 is the principal driver and is operating largely independent of solar influences.

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/310/5752/1313.full
Posted by SteeleRedux, Tuesday, 13 August 2019 4:50:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It all be Renewable-Fascist Konspiracy. You fools!

All those ABC peaceniks who refuse to feel pleasures of hot warm (but unfortunately not moist) blast of only occasionally exploding Cold Fusion ENERGY.

Behold the Mao chick selling Discount Takeout "Chinese High Yield Nuclear Tests" which admittedly crisped a few Sizzling Mongolians http://youtu.be/BuX5xug9prk?t=18s
Posted by plantagenet, Tuesday, 13 August 2019 5:23:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
SR,

"Human activity" is a pretty broad church.

Has anybody separated out all (or many) of the 'human activity' factors which might be causing temperature rise, to determine which ones can be ameliorated and/or minimised ?

For example, how much do asphalt road surfaces kick up urban temperatures ? And air-conditioning in those high-rise sealed buildings ? Yes, I know that air-conditioning produces cold air, but still ?

And, on a completely different track, 'natural activity', how much do sun spots, cosmic rays, etc., etc., kick up temperature ?

Out of all that, how much does CO2 contribute to the half-degree warming over the past eighty years, and the inch-rise in sea-level over about the same period ?

Or are these 'taboo questions' ?

Cheers,

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Wednesday, 14 August 2019 10:08:37 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Loudmouth,

We are talking about the demonstrable increases in CO2.

There are very good accounting of the amount of CO2 humans are putting into the atmosphere and simple physics tell us the result. There may well be other extending or mitigating factors but the core science around the direct impact of CO2 is irrefutable. Why is this so hard for you?
Posted by SteeleRedux, Wednesday, 14 August 2019 10:38:10 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy