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 10096 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

    Peter Bernard Ladkin: 
     

    It is obviously helpful in discussing climate warming, for the lessons it renders. 

    The Karoly-Stott analysis about how the likelihood of such a rise has increased because of anthropogenic factors is obviously generalisable to any situation in which there is enough reliable data. Indeed, it is explained in the Stone-Allen 2005 paper (available in preprint from the Oxford site). Similarlywith  the observations of Stott, Stone and Allen about the 2003 European heatwave.

    The point of citing that work is this. If you can show the risk of specific adverse events of a given magnitude has increased because of anthropogenic factors, then that provides an obvious argument for taking measures to mitigate the effect of those factors.

    I argue we should be doing that. 

    What is your position on that? That those anthropogenic factors aren't really there? 

    Thats's the point Peter, the anthropogenic factors are so small and they do not control the climate. So why scare the children and bankrupt the west?

Reply
  • 0

    Peter Bernard Ladkin: 
     

    It is obviously helpful in discussing climate warming, for the lessons it renders. 

    The Karoly-Stott analysis about how the likelihood of such a rise has increased because of anthropogenic factors is obviously generalisable to any situation in which there is enough reliable data. Indeed, it is explained in the Stone-Allen 2005 paper (available in preprint from the Oxford site). Similarlywith  the observations of Stott, Stone and Allen about the 2003 European heatwave.

    The point of citing that work is this. If you can show the risk of specific adverse events of a given magnitude has increased because of anthropogenic factors, then that provides an obvious argument for taking measures to mitigate the effect of those factors.

    I argue we should be doing that. 

    What is your position on that? That those anthropogenic factors aren't really there? 

    Thats's the point Peter, the anthropogenic factors are so small and they do not control the climate. So why scare the children and bankrupt the west?

Children
No Data

Community Rules & Guidelines