Membership Update

  • We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.
At the risk of pissing people off, I will keep this brief. There are many sources that debunk the widely quoted 95% (its actually 97%) number. Its based on a sample of scientists, many of whom were not climate experts, and many of whom didn't actually believe any warming was human induced. But its a figure widely quoted by politicians to push their cause. Everyone gets on the bandwagon because there is billions/trillions to be made in climate change zealotry. Google "Global temperatures last 2000 years and you will find any number of charts showing temperatures today are much lower than the Medieval warm period. The Earth has undergone periods of change over billions of years, including vast amounts of time when there was no ice at the poles. Polar ice is actually a relatively recent development. Global warming is NWO socialist agenda masquerading as environmentalism - driving massive worldwide wealth redistribution away from Western democracies (via environmental taxation) to developing countries like India and China, who continue to build thousands of coal fired power stations every year with barely a peep from the climate scientists. It has been proven that Australia could literally shut down completely, and it would not make one iota of difference to the Earths climate. Venezula is a Socialist country and is a basket case. Trump doesn't practice "pure capitalism" - there are vast amounts of regulatory controls that underpin the US system. There are many schools of thought on what caused the Great Depression - the monetarist view is that policy mistakes by regulators were the major causal factor, not unbridled/unregulated capitalism. The Roosevelt "New Deal" may have helped limit the pain of the Depression, but it was WW2 that actually ended it through massive government war programs. As for the GFC - one of the root causes was the Clinton (typically leftist) intervention in the housing market, loosening controls such that loans were extended to sectors of the economy that should never have been offered a loan. Those loans were bundled as CLO's and CDO's and sold as prime investments, when they were anything but.

No doubt climate change is more about certain people / organisations / countries making money than it is about climate.

My grandfather starting recording rain / temperatures on the family farm in Northern NSW in 1870, my brother still does.

Nothing’s changed , we get dry times, wet times, cold times , hot times and it all comes in a giant wave pattern.

Some years are hot and dry, some are wet and cooler.

We are now approaching 150 years of records , and as I say nothing’s changed in a general sense.
 
651618C7-E2B7-495A-BA37-F331F1760D94.jpeg
Well we could all start talking about lawn bowls , which I played today ( and lost).

And before you start laughing it’s a bloody good game and a lot more difficult than you might think.

Affirmative

But these ones kick ass
 
At the risk of pissing people off, I will keep this brief. There are many sources that debunk the widely quoted 95% (its actually 97%) number. Its based on a sample of scientists, many of whom were not climate experts, and many of whom didn't actually believe any warming was human induced. But its a figure widely quoted by politicians to push their cause. Everyone gets on the bandwagon because there is billions/trillions to be made in climate change zealotry. Google "Global temperatures last 2000 years and you will find any number of charts showing temperatures today are much lower than the Medieval warm period. The Earth has undergone periods of change over billions of years, including vast amounts of time when there was no ice at the poles. Polar ice is actually a relatively recent development. Global warming is NWO socialist agenda masquerading as environmentalism - driving massive worldwide wealth redistribution away from Western democracies (via environmental taxation) to developing countries like India and China, who continue to build thousands of coal fired power stations every year with barely a peep from the climate scientists. It has been proven that Australia could literally shut down completely, and it would not make one iota of difference to the Earths climate. Venezula is a Socialist country and is a basket case. Trump doesn't practice "pure capitalism" - there are vast amounts of regulatory controls that underpin the US system. There are many schools of thought on what caused the Great Depression - the monetarist view is that policy mistakes by regulators were the major causal factor, not unbridled/unregulated capitalism. The Roosevelt "New Deal" may have helped limit the pain of the Depression, but it was WW2 that actually ended it through massive government war programs. As for the GFC - one of the root causes was the Clinton (typically leftist) intervention in the housing market, loosening controls such that loans were extended to sectors of the economy that should never have been offered a loan. Those loans were bundled as CLO's and CDO's and sold as prime investments, when they were anything but.
Next time Terry can you give us the extended version...
 
No doubt climate change is more about certain people / organisations / countries making money than it is about climate.

My grandfather starting recording rain / temperatures on the family farm in Northern NSW in 1870, my brother still does.

Nothing’s changed , we get dry times, wet times, cold times , hot times and it all comes in a giant wave pattern.

Some years are hot and dry, some are wet and cooler.

We are now approaching 150 years of records , and as I say nothing’s changed in a general sense.
The wankey referee will be watching.
Whistle in hand.
Gazing at his....
Avatar
 
Ok, so I’m a conservative that believes us stupid humans are poisoning the earth and we need to get smarter and act. At the same time, I agree that there is a certain amount of hysterical commentary that completely ignores facts, that climate change is cyclical. I also strongly disagree with Australia’s position that we need to take the lead on climate change, at the expense of increasing energy charges, when we account for one poofteenth of the world population. It is the India’s, Chinese and Yanks that need to lead by example. For the record, the truth lays between the mad right and mad left, who at the end of the day are one and the same, insane fascists that everyone should bow to their insane will.
 
At the risk of pissing people off, I will keep this brief. There are many sources that debunk the widely quoted 95% (its actually 97%) number. Its based on a sample of scientists, many of whom were not climate experts, and many of whom didn't actually believe any warming was human induced. But its a figure widely quoted by politicians to push their cause. Everyone gets on the bandwagon because there is billions/trillions to be made in climate change zealotry. Google "Global temperatures last 2000 years and you will find any number of charts showing temperatures today are much lower than the Medieval warm period. The Earth has undergone periods of change over billions of years, including vast amounts of time when there was no ice at the poles. Polar ice is actually a relatively recent development. Global warming is NWO socialist agenda masquerading as environmentalism - driving massive worldwide wealth redistribution away from Western democracies (via environmental taxation) to developing countries like India and China, who continue to build thousands of coal fired power stations every year with barely a peep from the climate scientists. It has been proven that Australia could literally shut down completely, and it would not make one iota of difference to the Earths climate. Venezula is a Socialist country and is a basket case. Trump doesn't practice "pure capitalism" - there are vast amounts of regulatory controls that underpin the US system. There are many schools of thought on what caused the Great Depression - the monetarist view is that policy mistakes by regulators were the major causal factor, not unbridled/unregulated capitalism. The Roosevelt "New Deal" may have helped limit the pain of the Depression, but it was WW2 that actually ended it through massive government war programs. As for the GFC - one of the root causes was the Clinton (typically leftist) intervention in the housing market, loosening controls such that loans were extended to sectors of the economy that should never have been offered a loan. Those loans were bundled as CLO's and CDO's and sold as prime investments, when they were anything but.
This, ladies and gentlemen... is a debate between two eloquent minds. You will not find anything like this on a supporters site anywhere else...We really are blessed here on Silvertails. Great stuff @Bearfax and @TerryRandall!
 
Last edited:
You speak of Global Warming

Dear Bear .... you risk being chastised by the great "consensus" .... 6 years ago when that leading luminary in Scientific critical thinking ... Prince Charles gave a keynote speech and decried Global Warming ... he was quickly pulled aside and advisd that the new correct and approved text was to refer to climate "change"

There are several questions here ... 1) Do you believe in Climate Change? ... 2) Do you believe in Global warming? .... they are not the same question.
 
This, ladies and gentlemen... is a debate between two eloquent minds. You will not find anything like this on a supporters site anywhere else...We really are blessed here on Silvertails. Great stuff @Bearfax and @TerryRandall!

Would be better and more entertaining if they threw in the occasional numbnut or punchie ... but you are correct .... 2 well constructed view points ...
 
At the risk of pissing people off, I will keep this brief. There are many sources that debunk the widely quoted 95% (its actually 97%) number. Its based on a sample of scientists, many of whom were not climate experts, and many of whom didn't actually believe any warming was human induced. But its a figure widely quoted by politicians to push their cause. Everyone gets on the bandwagon because there is billions/trillions to be made in climate change zealotry. Google "Global temperatures last 2000 years and you will find any number of charts showing temperatures today are much lower than the Medieval warm period. The Earth has undergone periods of change over billions of years, including vast amounts of time when there was no ice at the poles. Polar ice is actually a relatively recent development. Global warming is NWO socialist agenda masquerading as environmentalism - driving massive worldwide wealth redistribution away from Western democracies (via environmental taxation) to developing countries like India and China, who continue to build thousands of coal fired power stations every year with barely a peep from the climate scientists. It has been proven that Australia could literally shut down completely, and it would not make one iota of difference to the Earths climate. Venezula is a Socialist country and is a basket case. Trump doesn't practice "pure capitalism" - there are vast amounts of regulatory controls that underpin the US system. There are many schools of thought on what caused the Great Depression - the monetarist view is that policy mistakes by regulators were the major causal factor, not unbridled/unregulated capitalism. The Roosevelt "New Deal" may have helped limit the pain of the Depression, but it was WW2 that actually ended it through massive government war programs. As for the GFC - one of the root causes was the Clinton (typically leftist) intervention in the housing market, loosening controls such that loans were extended to sectors of the economy that should never have been offered a loan. Those loans were bundled as CLO's and CDO's and sold as prime investments, when they were anything but.


I've been interested in climate issues since I was 8 years old Terry and it was one area I considered working in. I'm not socialist and my attitude towards climate concerns is well over 30 years old, well before it became fashionable. You raised the same old argument put forward by those who don't believe in human influenced climate change that has been bandied around for years.

Lets get some true science into this. Firstly talking about climate issues billions of years ago is failing to see that each epoch has its own climate conditions that affect the ecosystem. If we lived for example during the Cretaceous period, the temperature would about around 6 degrees on average hotter than today. Life thrived in the Antarctic at that time because the poles had no ice. But sea levels were at least 70 metres higher and none of the coastal areas we tend to build cities on would be above sea level. Further humans would not have survived in the tropical areas for many reasons not just temperature which was a few degrees higher on average (tropical areas don't rise in temperature as quickly as temperate and polar regions). There was no grass at all, because grass relies of cooler drier conditions. Grass developed only in the last few tens of millions of years. So no cereal. Most of the vegetables and fruit would be of a different variety, more suited to hot, wet conditions. But climate generally changes slowly not rapidly, giving the ecosystem time to adapt, mutate and even move. Earth was much hotter between 250 - 50 million years ago. It was also probably encased by ice about 600 million years ago (called Snowball Earth by palaeontologists). Many factors change climate including solar insulation and insolation. There are also tectonic factors and where the land plates lie, especially in relation to the poles.

About 50 million years ago India moved from the Antarctic and collided with Asia. This, and the encircling of land masses around the Arctic Ocean, led to a gradually cooling Earth. We now have glaciation periods and ice layers at the poles because of this cooling of the oceans in particular. Humans developed during ice age conditions. We are best suited for these cooler conditions and are food sources are dependent upon those conditions, especially plant life that cant change or migrate in the short term

All life influences temperature, its just how extensive that is. Elephants and hippos actions help maintain the Kalahari delta, in the middle of that desert in the wet season. Anaerobic life forms actually changed the Earth's atmosphere from Nitrogen-Carbon Dioxide to Nitrogen-Oxide, without which large life forms would not now exists. When humans arrived in the Americas, Australia, New Zealand, their actions quickly changed the climate by altering the dominant lifeforms, and especially changing the vegetation best suited for example to fire harvesting. There's nothing unusual about life forms changing climate.

We've changed the climate today through many factors but two stand out. The use of carbon based fuels and the preference for ruminant food animals, especially cattle. One sends CO2 into the atmosphere, the other CH4 (methane). Both are greenhouse gasses, because if you understood your chemistry, both retain back radiation (primarily infrared) for longer than oxygen and nitrogen can. Mind you without CO2 the average temperature would be -15 degrees on average and the Earth would be iced over. Water is also a greenhouse molecule and anyone living near the ocean has proof of that because the oceans hold heat and make evenings warmer on the coast than in the country.

It is impossible to alter CO2 levels, without changing temperature. CO2 is Earth's thermostat. During the Ice Age 20,000 years ago the CO2 level was at 180 parts per million and consequently 6 degrees cooler on average (doesnt need much to have an influence). During the pre-Industrial period it was 280 parts per million. It is now over 400 parts per million in the atmosphere (those readings come from Ice Cores and from readings taken over the past hundred years by international authorities). It is impossible for this not to impact on climate and that's why the scientific community agree.

As for other climate changes, yes the temperature was high around 750-1300 AD. But that has now been surpassed. It was actually a degree cooler during what was called the Maunder Event from 1300-1800, much of it caused by reduced sun spot activity. And there are cycles such as the El Nino and La Nina, as well as longer cycles. But these have been factored into studies.

In reality our climate should be cooling because if you know anything about the accredited Milankovich cycles, relating to the Earth's orbital cycles of 26,000, 41,000 and 100,000 years, we should be moving out of the Holocene and towards ice age conditions again, not getting hotter, a further example of the effect humans are having on climate. Many scientists are now describing our effect on climate as bringing about what's now called the Anthropocene, potentially thousands of years of climate caused by human influence.

The political issues I discuss later.
 
Dear @globaleagle ... can I submit this word for inclusion in the new and improved version of the Silvertails Urban Dictionary you are compiling ..... I am not sure of the meaning .... but it has a certain folksy charm .... perhaps a value of somewhere between 2 and a lot .

lol. Nah! The word had a meaning of a tiny amount, but in this enlightened age such words with negative connotations should make way for a more inclusive and accepting vocab.

Be excellent to one another!
 
I've been interested in climate issues since I was 8 years old Terry and it was one area I considered working in. I'm not socialist and my attitude towards climate concerns is well over 30 years old, well before it became fashionable. You raised the same old argument put forward by those who don't believe in human influenced climate change that has been bandied around for years.

Lets get some true science into this. Firstly talking about climate issues billions of years ago is failing to see that each epoch has its own climate conditions that affect the ecosystem. If we lived for example during the Cretaceous period, the temperature would about around 6 degrees on average hotter than today. Life thrived in the Antarctic at that time because the poles had no ice. But sea levels were at least 70 metres higher and none of the coastal areas we tend to build cities on would be above sea level. Further humans would not have survived in the tropical areas for many reasons not just temperature which was a few degrees higher on average (tropical areas don't rise in temperature as quickly as temperate and polar regions). There was no grass at all, because grass relies of cooler drier conditions. Grass developed only in the last few tens of millions of years. So no cereal. Most of the vegetables and fruit would be of a different variety, more suited to hot, wet conditions. But climate generally changes slowly not rapidly, giving the ecosystem time to adapt, mutate and even move. Earth was much hotter between 250 - 50 million years ago. It was also probably encased by ice about 600 million years ago (called Snowball Earth by palaeontologists). Many factors change climate including solar insulation and insolation. There are also tectonic factors and where the land plates lie, especially in relation to the poles.

About 50 million years ago India moved from the Antarctic and collided with Asia. This, and the encircling of land masses around the Arctic Ocean, led to a gradually cooling Earth. We now have glaciation periods and ice layers at the poles because of this cooling of the oceans in particular. Humans developed during ice age conditions. We are best suited for these cooler conditions and are food sources are dependent upon those conditions, especially plant life that cant change or migrate in the short term

All life influences temperature, its just how extensive that is. Elephants and hippos actions help maintain the Kalahari delta, in the middle of that desert in the wet season. Anaerobic life forms actually changed the Earth's atmosphere from Nitrogen-Carbon Dioxide to Nitrogen-Oxide, without which large life forms would not now exists. When humans arrived in the Americas, Australia, New Zealand, their actions quickly changed the climate by altering the dominant lifeforms, and especially changing the vegetation best suited for example to fire harvesting. There's nothing unusual about life forms changing climate.

We've changed the climate today through many factors but two stand out. The use of carbon based fuels and the preference for ruminant food animals, especially cattle. One sends CO2 into the atmosphere, the other CH4 (methane). Both are greenhouse gasses, because if you understood your chemistry, both retain back radiation (primarily infrared) for longer than oxygen and nitrogen can. Mind you without CO2 the average temperature would be -15 degrees on average and the Earth would be iced over. Water is also a greenhouse molecule and anyone living near the ocean has proof of that because the oceans hold heat and make evenings warmer on the coast than in the country.

It is impossible to alter CO2 levels, without changing temperature. CO2 is Earth's thermostat. During the Ice Age 20,000 years ago the CO2 level was at 180 parts per million and consequently 6 degrees cooler on average (doesnt need much to have an influence). During the pre-Industrial period it was 280 parts per million. It is now over 400 parts per million in the atmosphere (those readings come from Ice Cores and from readings taken over the past hundred years by international authorities). It is impossible for this not to impact on climate and that's why the scientific community agree.

As for other climate changes, yes the temperature was high around 750-1300 AD. But that has now been surpassed. It was actually a degree cooler during what was called the Maunder Event from 1300-1800, much of it caused by reduced sun spot activity. And there are cycles such as the El Nino and La Nina, as well as longer cycles. But these have been factored into studies.

In reality our climate should be cooling because if you know anything about the accredited Milankovich cycles, relating to the Earth's orbital cycles of 26,000, 41,000 and 100,000 years, we should be moving out of the Holocene and towards ice age conditions again, not getting hotter, a further example of the effect humans are having on climate. Many scientists are now describing our effect on climate as bringing about what's now called the Anthropocene, potentially thousands of years of climate caused by human influence.

The political issues I discuss later.
Am I the only one glad we are staving off another ice age?
I can't stand it now below 20 degrees...
 
Am I the only one glad we are staving off another ice age?
I can't stand it now below 20 degrees...


Harvie I think some on this forum think I'm pushing an ideal. I'm not. I hate the thought that we are causing climate change and it scares me regarding the welfare of my nieces and nephews and their families in future. I'm a Trekkie from way back, and would love the Trek future of no pollution, sickness, food for all, opportunities for all. I'd love it. But years of reading have consistently led me to the conclusion we are stuffing things up. I started thinking this since reading Rachel Carson's Silent Spring in my teens.

Whether 97% of scientists accept we are causing global warming or 90%, the point is the vast majority of scientific papers being printed in recent years on climate, support the notion. Add that over 200 nations supported the Paris call for control of greenhouse gases. As I said I am no scientist, though I read a lot, especially science journals. But I concede I am not knowledgeable enough, despite this, to counter what the scientific community and leaders of nations are saying. Who am I to seriously challenge those positions. Who are any of us.

But I recall vividly the arguments years ago for an against the dangers of cigarette smoking and there were some politicians and scientists who argued against the majority position. I also remember well those vested interest positions as my mother died of a tobacco related illness. I'm a realist who only accepts things provisionally based on the weight of evidence, whether I want to believe it or not. And I would truly wish I was wrong about this issue.
 
Harvie I think some on this forum think I'm pushing an ideal. I'm not. I hate the thought that we are causing climate change and it scares me regarding the welfare of my nieces and nephews and their families in future. I'm a Trekkie from way back, and would love the Trek future of no pollution, sickness, food for all, opportunities for all. I'd love it. But years of reading have consistently led me to the conclusion we are stuffing things up. I started thinking this since reading Rachel Carson's Silent Spring in my teens.

Whether 97% of scientists accept we are causing global warming or 90%, the point is the vast majority of scientific papers being printed in recent years on climate, support the notion. Add that over 200 nations supported the Paris call for control of greenhouse gases. As I said I am no scientist, though I read a lot, especially science journals. But I concede I am not knowledgeable enough, despite this, to counter what the scientific community and leaders of nations are saying. Who am I to seriously challenge those positions. Who are any of us.

But I recall vividly the arguments years ago for an against the dangers of cigarette smoking and there were some politicians and scientists who argued against the majority position. I also remember well those vested interest positions as my mother died of a tobacco related illness. I'm a realist who only accepts things provisionally based on the weight of evidence, whether I want to believe it or not. And I would truly wish I was wrong about this issue.
All good Bearfax. My comment wasn't really any attempt to enter the debate because I would be blown out of the water and I'm enjoying the goings on with you guys but in my own simple view I don't want to be 1,000km under the ice.
Even though I won't be around to see it.
And as I mentioned.
I hate cold weather.
 

Latest posts

Team P W L PD Pts
3 3 0 48 6
3 2 1 45 4
3 2 1 28 4
3 2 1 22 4
3 2 1 15 4
3 2 1 14 4
2 1 1 13 4
3 2 1 10 4
2 1 1 6 4
3 2 1 -3 4
3 1 2 0 2
3 1 2 -5 2
3 1 2 -15 2
3 1 2 -22 2
3 1 2 -36 2
2 0 2 -56 2
3 0 3 -64 0
Back
Top Bottom