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.
The development of the whole climate change scenario bears a resemblance to the low level radiation risks problem.
The science was interfered with on supposedly morally defensible grounds which has had and will have long term detrimental effects.
In the case of low level radiation the effects were accentuated with a view to stopping atmospheric nuclear testing. Apparently a good thing but has resulted in 10’s thousands of deaths due to unnecessary evacuations and unnecessary abortions as well as many deaths relating to the fossil fuel industry and associated pollution that could have been avoided by the greater uptake of nuclear power.
The science was and is obviously wrong when you look at the lack of effects from the large variations in natural background radiation levels. If LNT was correct it would be visible in it’s effects in high radiation areas of the world. There are people still looking but have not come up with anything yet. Others are researching the opposite, that low level radiation is beneficial or necessary.
Higher levels of radiation (more than 100 mSv short term dose) have detrimental effects and above 1 Sv are definitely harmful.
The basic premise of protect our planet by reducing our consumption of finite resources, reducing waste and sensible use of land and sea is good and defensible. Unfortunately this has been hijacked by the CO2 brigade who are using incomplete ‘science’ to promote their view that we need to use vast amounts of our finite resources to promote inefficient ‘renewable energy’ sources. In most cases reality is simply ignored and everything is blamed on man-made climate change. Property destruction due to wildfires is caused by stopping natural burning of waste material and building evermore in and close to forests. Flooding is very often caused by building in floodplains or by bad land management removing run off areas.
The same scaremongering techniques are used in both cases, although there are generally less anti-nuclear protests the fear instilled in people is still there. The climate change fear being generated was the reason for starting this thread.
The development of the whole climate change scenario bears a resemblance to the low level radiation risks problem.
The science was interfered with on supposedly morally defensible grounds which has had and will have long term detrimental effects.
In the case of low level radiation the effects were accentuated with a view to stopping atmospheric nuclear testing. Apparently a good thing but has resulted in 10’s thousands of deaths due to unnecessary evacuations and unnecessary abortions as well as many deaths relating to the fossil fuel industry and associated pollution that could have been avoided by the greater uptake of nuclear power.
The science was and is obviously wrong when you look at the lack of effects from the large variations in natural background radiation levels. If LNT was correct it would be visible in it’s effects in high radiation areas of the world. There are people still looking but have not come up with anything yet. Others are researching the opposite, that low level radiation is beneficial or necessary.
Higher levels of radiation (more than 100 mSv short term dose) have detrimental effects and above 1 Sv are definitely harmful.
The basic premise of protect our planet by reducing our consumption of finite resources, reducing waste and sensible use of land and sea is good and defensible. Unfortunately this has been hijacked by the CO2 brigade who are using incomplete ‘science’ to promote their view that we need to use vast amounts of our finite resources to promote inefficient ‘renewable energy’ sources. In most cases reality is simply ignored and everything is blamed on man-made climate change. Property destruction due to wildfires is caused by stopping natural burning of waste material and building evermore in and close to forests. Flooding is very often caused by building in floodplains or by bad land management removing run off areas.
The same scaremongering techniques are used in both cases, although there are generally less anti-nuclear protests the fear instilled in people is still there. The climate change fear being generated was the reason for starting this thread.
We're about to take you to the IET registration website. Don't worry though, you'll be sent straight back to the community after completing the registration.
Continue to the IET registration site
