1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Climate change modelling "a fools paradise".

Discussion in 'Personal' started by lexus300, Mar 19, 2019.

  1. racroesus

    racroesus Star commenter

    The markers exist. The deductions may be wrong. We may not be able to say that something will happen with certainty but we can show what has been happening. We can then decide on the most likely scenario. Exxon have done this but pretended they had done something else.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobil_climate_change_controversy

    Exxon decided it was true.
     
  2. racroesus

    racroesus Star commenter

    Agreement about something at last.
     
  3. racroesus

    racroesus Star commenter

    Exxon accepted that burning fossil fuels was the problem a long time ago.
     
  4. racroesus

    racroesus Star commenter

    Exxon think it is CO2 from fossil fuels. Remember, the Devil isn't an atheist.
     
    Nanook_rubs_it likes this.
  5. Maths_Shed

    Maths_Shed Occasional commenter

    FrankWolley and Spoofer4114 like this.
  6. valentyna_holenkova

    valentyna_holenkova New commenter

    It doesn't take 'good' science to identify the massive problem we face today. I was active during the late fifties through to the early eighties campaigning one ecological causes that were obvious to us then, and implementing actual solutions rather than taking a prolonged holiday in central London upsetting the locals. Useful things we set up during that time include:

    • workers cooperatives (mass network of - equal pay / equality of sexes - public ownership)
    • Transport by cycle, electric milk floats, horse and cart - all where possible
    • sociable shower system (on the commune I lived - barrels of water encased in hay for heating - gravity for pumping)
    • Truth to materials: i.e., no decoration whatsoever so no need for painting and repainting. Wood was left as bare wood, stone and plaster left bare inside and out.
    • No holidays - not necessary since life was busy all year and enjoyable (no need for a change/rest)
    • Self sufficient where possible: vegetables and dairy. Most of us were vegetarian
    • Clothing all handmade and repaired - not renewed
    • insulation and more insulation
    • primitive wind power

    None of this needed costly hoards of scientists travelling the world relentlessly convening in plush hotels to repeat the climate change doom mantra. Sadly intelligent people fall for this but are still greedy and enjoy the attention.
     
    alexei_yanovich and lexus300 like this.
  7. racroesus

    racroesus Star commenter

    And you are still doing all of this?
     
  8. valentyna_holenkova

    valentyna_holenkova New commenter

    Yes. Age has disadvantaged me to some extent. But I still live in a commune environment.

    Serious efforts really began during the seventies towards alternative life-styles, not the anarchist types we see in London in the form of XR, but ordinary people willing to combine forces and forge a different way of life independent (as much as possible) from the O-levels and a 9to5 job with a house in suburbia. We were also active in starting up and running REAL 'free schools' that focused on creativity through personal development (absent from state education today). Our life-style wasn't pushed on others by direct action, but passed on through education and shared experience (music, theater,) through the many free festivals of the 70s and 80s - particularly the Albian fayres in East Anglia. Unfortunately, this spirit seemed become lost with rising globalisation, the EU project which put movement of people and goods as King without considering the local, small scale, nor considering the environmental damage caused by globalism.
     
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2019
    lexus300 and alexei_yanovich like this.
  9. racroesus

    racroesus Star commenter

    How many are in your commune? Do they work outside the commune? Why should age disadvantage you? What do you do about your disadvantages?
     
  10. JL48

    JL48 Star commenter

    the best of them are moronic. The worst are criminal.
     
    Maths_Shed likes this.
  11. valentyna_holenkova

    valentyna_holenkova New commenter

    About 70 in all in the commune. Some have part time work outside. Age lessens my ability to be physically productive - that's the main downside. Now I rely more on younger members instead but of course am a wealth of information.
     
    lexus300 and racroesus like this.
  12. valentyna_holenkova

    valentyna_holenkova New commenter

    That's a great way to influence people - just insulting them. It's a tactic used by XR. I found that the most cynical could be won over to our way of thinking through warm debate, theater and music. But then that was during less bigoted times some 35+ years ago.
     
    lexus300 likes this.
  13. lexus300

    lexus300 Star commenter

    The problem is there are so many opinions rather than solid fact based science. The so called concensus is a farce when you actually look at the signatures. Until the science on Climate Change which includes 'as a part' global warming which includes 'as a part' AGW, produce real science from neutral sources I will remain a full blooded AGW skeptic. As for the modelling, well, data should never be altered to suit the software or indeed the desired outcomes.
     
  14. lexus300

    lexus300 Star commenter

    I listened to the radio programme on R4 Tuesday morning and their problem was fear of Government and others controlling their business and taxation levels they moved their research to counter politicians. I take it you did not listen in.
     
  15. lexus300

    lexus300 Star commenter

    If you use less water to grow more then you get more growth for the same amount of water.
     
  16. racroesus

    racroesus Star commenter

    Angling on Tuesdays. But I heard it as I was driving home.
     
    lexus300 likes this.
  17. racroesus

    racroesus Star commenter

    An ancestor of Exxon had worked it out in 1957. They decided that questioning the research of climatologists was the best way to block regulation of their industry so that they could continue. All that your Heartland videos are is Exxon's smoke generation.
     
  18. racroesus

    racroesus Star commenter

  19. Nanook_rubs_it

    Nanook_rubs_it Star commenter

    What other research conducted by NASA, ESA, MIT, CalTech, University of Cambridge/Oxford/Imperial College et all, do you think is also corrupt?

    Indeed it shouldn't and isn't; I suppose you also think 'regression analysis' is 'data tampering'.

    Data should also not be cherry picked as by your Heartland Institute shills.
     
  20. JL48

    JL48 Star commenter

    I'm not trying to influence them. This isn't a debate on Brexit or a GE - where different perspectives are valid. This is a wilful and damaging denial of the facts, largely based on the nonsense coming out of the USA. As I said, people that believe (or at least claim to believe) this nonsense are either moronic or criminal - and should be treated as such.
     

Share This Page