Another Reason For Climate Change......

[10ClarionSt]

.......is something you may have noticed every day. It's a big yellow thing in the sky called the Sun. That's what drives the climate on this planet, nothing else. However, you mustn't ignore the self-centred, glory-seeking scientists who seem to be basing everything on Spinach type calculations. Otherwise, everything's fine thanks! :o)

[andres]

Cutting down on air traffic that is causing atmospheric disturbances might help.

[naomi24]

Jim, I don’t particularly ‘want’ you to listen to anything I say. It matters not. I realise that ideas that challenge the text book mantra aren’t welcome to you - so that’s that really.

[237SJ]

@ 20:17. Have a look at Flightradar then have a look at the Marine Traffic app..

[naomi24]

Gness, you really inflict AB on your guests? Poor souls.

[gness]

Only in areas of their expertise, Naomi. It's nice to bring a smile now and again. Try it one day.

[andres]

20.29-- No wonder then with all that air traffic.

[Atheist]

Naomi 20:29
Can't you be serious when there's a discussion about a serious matter?

[naomi24]

I am serious atheist.

[Atheist]

Naomi:
"Gness, you really inflict AB on your guests? Poor souls."
A light-hearted aside, of course.

[Atheist]

Naomi, 20:26.
You think that a scientist's comment is just trotting out something from a text-book mantra? You disappoint me.

[naomi24]

You keep telling me I disappoint you, atheist. I wonder why you bother.

[jim360]

The flaw in your thinking, Naomi, is that "challenging the textbook mantra" amounts merely to asking, "what if the textbook mantra is wrong?". Well, where is it wrong? Why is it wrong? Can you point to something specific that's wrong? Can you find some way to improve upon it?

But you never do any of these things. That doesn't make you a challenger: it makes you a heckler.

Still, there's plenty of opportunity to change this. I've pointed you to the relevant textbook. Point me, please, to the flaw(s) in it, why you think they are flaws, what concrete reasons you have for thinking that they are flawed, and so on. I promise you, when you can do that, I'll be all ears.

[naomi24]

Doubtless my thinking is flawed, Jim, but that’s not to say that yours isn’t - especially insofar as it’s possible … just possible … that science is placing more emphasis on ‘man-made’ global warming than is justified.

Gness, I prefer to smile with people than to laugh at them. It’s kinder.

[douglas9401]

"Gness, I prefer to smile with people than to laugh at them."

Looks like the juxtaposition of that statement and veracity has stunned the assembled.

[New Judge]

//Cutting down on air traffic that is causing atmospheric disturbances might help.//

What you mean like the aircraft (including 400 private jets) that have ferried in the 27,000 delegates to the COP27 meeting in Egypt? This jamboree is of dubious value and if those attending were worth their salt they'd devise an alternative method of talking to each other so as to improve their credibility.

[jim360]

// Doubtless my thinking is flawed, Jim, but that’s not to say that yours isn’t - especially insofar as it’s possible … just possible … that science is placing more emphasis on ‘man-made’ global warming than is justified. //

I'm sure my thinking is flawed in its own ways. And, of course it's possible. But merely saying so advances the conversation not a jot. Why do you think it's possible? What, specifically, is the flaw in the consensus that you've identified?

I think really this is, and always has been, my point: criticism in science, if it isn't concrete, is next to meaningless. The consensus often shifts, but that's because someone has found something concrete, something empirical, to offer as an alternative. The concrete is very persuasive, even to a community that can tend to be overly conservative at times.

So, yes, that's the point I'd stress: It's much easier to criticise something if you've first made an effort to understand it properly. Really dive into the details, find a specific flaw, and offer a specific solution. Otherwise, it's just a cold reading offering nothing. Any fool can read a paper and ask, "what if it's wrong?", but can they point to where on the page it's wrong? That's worth listening to; that's always worth a discussion.

[andres]

NJ^^^ All air traffic needs to be reduced. Commercial,private, jets and public aeroplanes are all disturbing the atmosphere.

[naomi24]

Jim, records of the climate changing long before the impact of the industrial revolution aside, I guess I’m the epitome of any fool who asks ‘What if it’s wrong?’

[New Judge]

//NJ^^^ All air traffic needs to be reduced. Commercial,private, jets and public aeroplanes are all disturbing the atmosphere.//

Depends what your aims are.

However, that aside, these people who attended the jamboree in Sharm-el-Sheikh are, like you, suggesting that air travel needs to be curtailed. Yet 27,000 of them converge on a middle eastern holiday spot, almost all of them travelling by air to discuss - among other things - the damage that aviation is allegedly causing to the planet.

These meetings are a farce. They achieve no useful purpose. There was one in the UK just a year ago and virtually none of the commitments made there have been achieved. The waffle that has been going on about climate change and the expensive measures taken to combat it by the UK and a few other minor emitters have also served no purpose. Gobal emissions and global temperatures are still increasing and will continue to do so as long as China keeps burning more coal than the rest of the world put together and India chases hard to catch them up.

Here's the bottom line:

"Climate change is a big problem and aviation is causing a lot of it. We must stop people flying."

"Yes you're right. I know what - 27,000 of us had better get together in the Middle East to discuss it".

It's hypocritical and if it wasn't so bloody annoying it would make you laugh. You couldn't make it up.

[gness]

As long as you know when people are smiling with you and not at you, Naomi..... though I doubt you do. :-)