Cumberland,

When it comes to environmental issues you and other AGW deniers are 'outsiders'.

And your comments are a hindrance, not a help.

All that you and others of your ilk are really interested in is protecting your dividends from shares in the fossil fuel industry.

Personally I think it is all too late anyway and the worse is yet to come.

Hi Hasbeen,

Please read my last post again, but with a sense of irony: half a degree rise in eighty years ? Catastrophe ? Half an inch sea-level rise in a century, a catastrophe ?

I was trying to be polite to the hysterics. No, I don't think global warming is some dreadfully, barely-solveable, problem. It's in hand, science, technology and crass business investment sense will see to that.

And of course, there will always be climate change, one way or the other, much of it well out of our control, but not particularly rapid or brutal.

There are vastly more important and urgent issues in the world today. Jesus, I'm for the stake now :). Can I have the little bag of gunpowder under the heart, like Joan of Arc, please ?

Joe

Mr Opinion

Hahaha wotta loser.

So you admit that
a) you weren't interested in a discussion about science in the first place, you just want to go round and round endlessly repeating your brainwashing, and going straight to ad hominem and question-begging when challenged hahahahahaaaa
b) you thought "science" enables you to use a thermometer to read off what the tax rate should be hahahahaha
c) you have no idea what the data set is to know whether the downsides of any climate policy are rationally justified or not - you don't even admit there is such a thing - and killing all the human beings would satisfy your intellectual standard pffffft!
d) even if you did understand what you're talking about, which you don't, you agree it would be would be irrelevant!
pffffft, hahahahahaha, wotta loser, hahahaha!

I guess you must be just an older and uglier version of Greta the Brainwashed Mongoloid - bitter and twisted before her time.

Of course, *real* science doesn't consist of just a jumble of ad hominems, begging the question, and appeal to authority, & trotting out 16 year old poster girls to front your intellectual bankruptcy, and if you knew anything about science, you would know that.

But perhaps if you bust out another few hundred billion on corrupt self-serving propaganda and rent-seeking parasites, you might eventually muster a rational argument?
pfffft hahahahahahahaha!

What you've got is misanthropic anxiety neurosis and a narcisisstic messiah complex, not science you loser hahahahah what a joke.

Post proof that the 7 billion people of humankind appointed YOU, of all people, to be their savious and redeemer BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

But it's too late! Because DE SKAH IS A-FAWLINl! DE SKAH IS A-FAWLINl! remember? All thos record cold events caused by global warming hahahahahaha!

Don't worry! Call Mr Environmental Sociologist! He will save the world forever, based on his brainwashed certainty that mankind is a noxious pest, and the solution is unlimited government power over anything and everything without limit or reason.

Hahahahaha. Real clown-world stuff!!

Science without logic is just story-telling, and that's all you've got hahahaha!

Cumberland,

Can't you find something to discuss that is more suited to who and what you are. Like the stock market, or cars, or football.

Trying to put yourself on the same level as people who are highly educated and knowledgeable will only make you look like a buffoon.

Like all AGW deniers you have a twisted sense of reality that is only matched by your lack of knowledge and training needed to discuss environmental concerns.

Sit on your sofa and count your money or watch the football or whatever it is that makes you people happy.

And leave the big important things to the people who know what they are talking about.

Loudmouth2 Said- "Can there be anything that we can do to avoid dreadful catastrophe ?"

Answer- Yes AGW can be reduced by reducing the "A"'s the anthropoid's. Less people less AGW. There may be additional things that could be done to reduce global warming. Reducing the people on the planet needs to be done. We need to find ways to decrease the birthrate in both high birthrate countries and high population countries. I would like to see a world population under one billion.

Canem Malum,

You would really have to wind back the clock in a hurry to only have 1 billion humans.

In 1900, world population was 1.6 billion.

Yes in just 120 years we have gone from 1.6 to just under 8 billion of us and it's still increasing.

Maybe China was hoping to wipe out the competition when it unleashed the Coronavirus.

According to Jared Diamond the sustainable population is 5,6 billion. That was reached in 1986 and the population is expected to reach about 11 billion in the next 30 years.

Climatologists told us we must STOP putting carbon into the atmosphere NOW.

That was about 12 years ago and the emissions have actually increased by about 50% in that 12 year period.

I think it is too late to stop the rot. Even if we stop emitting carbon TODAY the benefits would not be seen until about 100 years from now and sometime in between all the glaciers - being mostly Antarctica and Greenland - will have melted and probably never return again.