Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 167 replies
  • Subscribers 14 subscribers
  • Views 10054 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

I hope the Climate Activists are proud of the effect their lies are having on the younger generation

Roger B

If this survey is real the messages these young people are receiving are completely wrong.

We need to reduce our impact on our planet but CO2 is a complete red herring. The current ECS (temperature increase for a doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere) is centred around 3°C (IPCC AR6). The 2°C will destroy civilisation is simply made up.

 

 

Parents
  • 0

    Simon Barker: 
     

    So it can't be described that simply.  What's the problem?

    I would recommend to let dr. Howard Cork Hayden, professor emeritus of physics at University of Connecticut explain to you what the problem is. It would be interesting to hear if anyone could point out where he is wrong in this 54 minute presentation:

    I don't see an ad-hominem attack gets you anywhere.  The climate has certainly warmed in the last few decades.  All the predictions had huge error margins on them.  Nobody predicted exact values for warming.

    I was not intending any ad-hominem when suggesting that most of the activists are not knowledgeable about climate science; it has been my personal experience that certain concepts are simply parroted in media without understanding of any underlying physics. In an ideal world this would work - one should be able to trust the scientists. In case of climate science, opinions of some scientists are politically amplified while those of others are muffled.

    Regarding predictions: in addition to overblown output of most climate models, there have been many literal crises predictions and almost all have been wrong:

    https://extinctionclock.org/

Reply
  • 0

    Simon Barker: 
     

    So it can't be described that simply.  What's the problem?

    I would recommend to let dr. Howard Cork Hayden, professor emeritus of physics at University of Connecticut explain to you what the problem is. It would be interesting to hear if anyone could point out where he is wrong in this 54 minute presentation:

    I don't see an ad-hominem attack gets you anywhere.  The climate has certainly warmed in the last few decades.  All the predictions had huge error margins on them.  Nobody predicted exact values for warming.

    I was not intending any ad-hominem when suggesting that most of the activists are not knowledgeable about climate science; it has been my personal experience that certain concepts are simply parroted in media without understanding of any underlying physics. In an ideal world this would work - one should be able to trust the scientists. In case of climate science, opinions of some scientists are politically amplified while those of others are muffled.

    Regarding predictions: in addition to overblown output of most climate models, there have been many literal crises predictions and almost all have been wrong:

    https://extinctionclock.org/

Children
No Data

Community Rules & Guidelines