• You need to be a registered member of Barbel Fishing World to post on these forums. Some of the forums are hidden from non-members. Please refer to the instructions on the ‘Register’ page for details of how to join the new incarnation of BFW...

global warming

Terry Harman said:
www.historic-uk.com

The Thames Frost Fairs in London

Between 1607 and 1814, there were a total of seven major frost fairs held on the frozen River Thames in the heart of London. These fairs hosted bull-baiting, pop-up pubs, and even saw a king or two taking part in the festivities!
www.historic-uk.com www.historic-uk.com


oh look climate change in the 1600,s ………shouldn’t we all be dead by now
Click to expand...
Yes. In the 1600's the country experienced the frozen river Thames and a flourishing wine production industry in Yorkshire. Demonstrating extremes of temperature in the same century. If it's not talk of the next mini ice-age in the 1970's to the global warming from the 1990's going forward. Possibly over simplistic.
Another example of rapid temperature change (this time going down) is in the video on post 19 on this thread. Henrik Svensmark cites an example of the Vikings (his Scandinavian ancestors) leaving Greenland in the 15th Century due to it getting extremely cold. Presumably no longer green.
 
Last edited:
Joe Winstanley said:
Hi Ady,

William Happer is a respected physicist, but's he's not a climatologist and he's certainly not a biologist based on his astonishingly simplistic interpretation of the impact of increased CO2 levels on agricultural productivity (34m in).

Whilst its true that plants can increased C02 can result in plants growing quicker he overlooks the other factors that limit plant growth such as available nutrients, water and temperature. This is really basic stuff, and completely undermines his argument.

Numerous studies across the planet evaluating the impact of rising CO2 levels on agricultural productivity show a notable decrease in agricultural productivity and in some cases a significant decrease in nutritional quality.

45m in he uses Matt Ridley to support his claims. This should ring serious alarms bells!

Matt Ridley isn't a climatologist, he studied pheasant mating for his zoology degree before becoming a journalist. His list of achievements include being the Chairman of the first British bank to collapse in over 130 years causing a run on the banks and contributing largely to the 2008 banking crisis. He also lobbied extensively against the ban of neonicotinoids which have been subsequently proved to irrefutably cause significant ecological damage. Oh and he also owns a substantial number of large open cast mines and large areas of land containing large coal reserves so no vested interest there then!

Cheers,

Joe
Click to expand...
Hi Joe.

I was actually searching for a video,that I watched some time ago, of a scientist, that was using (long standing verified) chemical thermodynamic equations to disprove the theory that CO2 is the driver of 'climate change'. Basically, he concluded, that we could double the amount of CO2 currently in the atmosphere with no change in atmospheric temperature. I could not find it again (maybe taken down?) so posted the Happer video instead. I'll take your word on Matt Ridley, although I have never heard of him.

Nevertheless, Happer seems to make some very valid observations and conclusions backed up with data graphically displayed.

I agree the agro-chemical industry has a lot to answer for, and should be held to account for the cause of environmental damage, for profit. What chance that though if successive governments have allowed the water industry to pollute our rivers with impunity? I think we all on the same page with this other than the existence or otherwise of 'climate change'.

Cheers Ady
 
Graham Elliott said:
It's likely that a World War including all the Main players will happen to wipe out 75% of the population before the Hell fire heat does for everyone.

The Industrial World will not be fouling the Earth then.

So just chill chaps🤣
Click to expand...
That or the Yellowstone Caldera waking up...or one of those Meteorites!

Time for the pub..
 
... already in the pub, pissed.... here goes

The science around climate change is incontestable. Somebody earlier in the thread summed it up, yes there are natural climate cycles; but we as in humans are speeding that cycle up.

Also I just wanted to add - it is hard to argue for science and not talk about thermodynamics. Climate is energy. Fuel is energy. People are energy.

"Everything is energy." Albert Einstein

"the second law of thermodynamics says that entropy always increases with time"

We, the climate, the rivers, the mountains, the Earth will not last forever. It will end. We need to make a decision to prolong that with inhibited use of energy, or to accelerate that by using more ENERGY.

0 carbon means nothing. Reversing climate change is impossible. Once you start to accelerate that entropy you cannot reverse it. Only slow it down.

Sorry bit deep I know 😂
 
David Schofield said:
It’s a tax grab scam end of. The earth hasn’t warmed up in the last 15 years
Click to expand...

Yeah, the powers that be had to invent this huge, elaborate, global scam as they were struggling to find ways to tax us!

It's probably safe to say the real truth is somewhere in between Gretta and GB news. It's painfully obvious to me we're having an affect on the climate, though I doubt it's end of the world stuff.

Over population and consumption is a far bigger problem IMO.
Graphs like this are depressing.
20221124_212518.png
 
The governments know the likely outcomes and the upheavals that will come with it and no doubt will have been 'gaming' the possibilities on supercomputers. As climate zones shift and arable land becomes arid (and vice versa), countries with the greatest ranges of longitude may be able to cope. Countries who have, will be warring against those that have not and those living in the latter will be forced to migrate for food, water and shelter. Do you honestly believe that the average bloke in the street will be told about what the future we are facing really holds?
 
If we can’t even keep our own rivers clean I doubt politicians ( or ‘the average bloke in the street’) really gives a monkey’s about climate change……
G.T.
 
Anthony Pearson said:
The governments know the likely outcomes and the upheavals that will come with it and no doubt will have been 'gaming' the possibilities on supercomputers. As climate zones shift and arable land becomes arid (and vice versa), countries with the greatest ranges of longitude may be able to cope. Countries who have, will be warring against those that have not and those living in the latter will be forced to migrate for food, water and shelter. Do you honestly believe that the average bloke in the street will be told about what the future we are facing really holds?
Click to expand...
You seem to be crediting the political classes as possessing level of foresight and planning that has hitherto not been witnessed before!

I agree regarding the impact on food production, and the availability of water.
 
Rhys Perry said:
Yeah, the powers that be had to invent this huge, elaborate, global scam as they were struggling to find ways to tax us!

It's probably safe to say the real truth is somewhere in between Gretta and GB news. It's painfully obvious to me we're having an affect on the climate, though I doubt it's end of the world stuff.

Over population and consumption is a far bigger problem IMO.
Graphs like this are depressing.
View attachment 21773
Click to expand...
Well like others, I would put my pennies worth in. The bio-mass of humans. CANNOT BE SUSTAINED "The end is nigh"; sadly it will be drawn out and we will see a lot of suffering while we pretend that we can improve it! When man decided to be their own God; the world was lost and we made our own mess. we would not have nitrate and phosphate pollution if we didn't need to artificially enhance the amount of food required to feed far too many mouths. We would not have high levels of chemicals such as PCB's etc and growth enhancing hormones used in fish food production (ie pellets); or Cocaine in our water tables if we didn't need to produce more food or to keep the population happy from the mass depression caused by the greed and political need to always see economics growth, et al, et al.
The song "Get them out by Friday" by Genesis in 1972 on the album "FOXTROT" says it all.
I am opposed to any human reduction per sa, my faith would tear my to pieces; but, is it thre only answer?
 
Before this thread appeared I started listening to this podcast, finally finished it (I listen to it to & fro from work).
Really interesting discussion that cuts through the alarmist stuff.


Better listened to via podcast app if you can, Lex Fridman's other episodes are also very good.
 
Ady Brayshaw said:
Yes. In the 1600's the country experienced the frozen river Thames and a flourishing wine production industry in Yorkshire. Demonstrating extremes of temperature in the same century. If it's not talk of the next mini ice-age in the 1970's to the global warming from the 1990's going forward. Possibly over simplistic.
Another example of rapid temperature change (this time going down) is in the video on post 19 on this thread. Henrik Svensmark cites an example of the Vikings (his Scandinavian ancestors) leaving Greenland in the 15th Century due to it getting extremely cold. Presumably no longer green.
Click to expand...
Do you really think that the Thames fairs indicate only what you think it might?
 
Damian Kimmins said:
Do you really think that the Thames fairs indicate only what you think it might?
Click to expand...
Indeed.

There is a school of thought that suggests the 'Little Ice Age' was caused by human activities, namely rapid depopulation of the americas due to the arrival of European explorers and their impact devastating impact of the indigenous populations. The subsequent changes in vegetation, e.g..mass reforestation, resulted in rapid levels of C02 sequestraion that was enough to drop the global temperature.

www.sciencedirect.com

Earth system impacts of the European arrival and Great Dying in the Americas after 1492

Human impacts prior to the Industrial Revolution are not well constrained. We investigate whether the decline in global atmospheric CO2 concentration …
www.sciencedirect.com www.sciencedirect.com
 
Stephen Crowhurst said:
I find all too often these discussions hinge on opinions fuelled by zealots. We’ve lost the ability to realise two opposing truths can still be truths.
Click to expand...

They can’t in this situation though, because denial of man-made climate change isn’t in any way a ‘truth’. There’s decades and a mountain of research and evidence to prove its happening. I’m not a zealot in any way and it’s a bit strange to suggest anyone agreeing with the proven facts is one tbh.

It’s always interesting and a bit baffling to read conspiracy theories though, when the obvious is actually right in front of us. Take the ‘control‘ element that’s been mentioned, that somehow climate change is made up in order to control us. Yet, for starters, no government is actually doing anywhere near enough to combat climate change, they don’t really care.

Secondly, why would they do it covertly? They’re doing it in front of us. Look at recent law changes. The right to protest severely weakened, anti-trade union laws made stricter to the point where a union needs a far higher percentage of a vote in order to strike than a government does to be elected as a majority to run the country. Taking away peoples power bit by bit. That’s the stuff we should be worried about, yet ironically quite a lot of the population actually supports law changes like these!

Then there’s tax, the Tories have just shoved up taxes even higher than they already were, and they were the highest for 70 years. They don’t need to make stuff up, they just take the absolute piss anyway, grabbing as much of our money as they can until they inevitably get voted out in 2 years.
 
Rob Mitchell said:
They can’t in this situation though, because denial of man-made climate change isn’t in any way a ‘truth’. There’s decades and a mountain of research and evidence to prove its happening. I’m not a zealot in any way and it’s a bit strange to suggest anyone agreeing with the proven facts is one tbh.

It’s always interesting and a bit baffling to read conspiracy theories though, when the obvious is actually right in front of us. Take the ‘control‘ element that’s been mentioned, that somehow climate change is made up in order to control us. Yet, for starters, no government is actually doing anywhere near enough to combat climate change, they don’t really care.

Secondly, why would they do it covertly? They’re doing it in front of us. Look at recent law changes. The right to protest severely weakened, anti-trade union laws made stricter to the point where a union needs a far higher percentage of a vote in order to strike than a government does to be elected as a majority to run the country. Taking away peoples power bit by bit. That’s the stuff we should be worried about, yet ironically quite a lot of the population actually supports law changes like these!

Then there’s tax, the Tories have just shoved up taxes even higher than they already were, and they were the highest for 70 years. They don’t need to make stuff up, they just take the absolute piss anyway, grabbing as much of our money as they can until they inevitably get voted out in 2 years.
Click to expand...
I’m afraid Rob you’ve missed the very point I was making.
 
Rob Mitchell said:
They can’t in this situation though, because denial of man-made climate change isn’t in any way a ‘truth’. There’s decades and a mountain of research and evidence to prove its happening. I’m not a zealot in any way and it’s a bit strange to suggest anyone agreeing with the proven facts is one tbh.

It’s always interesting and a bit baffling to read conspiracy theories though, when the obvious is actually right in front of us. Take the ‘control‘ element that’s been mentioned, that somehow climate change is made up in order to control us. Yet, for starters, no government is actually doing anywhere near enough to combat climate change, they don’t really care.

Secondly, why would they do it covertly? They’re doing it in front of us. Look at recent law changes. The right to protest severely weakened, anti-trade union laws made stricter to the point where a union needs a far higher percentage of a vote in order to strike than a government does to be elected as a majority to run the country. Taking away peoples power bit by bit. That’s the stuff we should be worried about, yet ironically quite a lot of the population actually supports law changes like these!

Then there’s tax, the Tories have just shoved up taxes even higher than they already were, and they were the highest for 70 years. They don’t need to make stuff up, they just take the absolute piss anyway, grabbing as much of our money as they can until they inevitably get voted out in 2 years.
Click to expand...
You may well be right except that you seem to have forgotten that the climate changed periodIcally before ‘man’ roamed the earth. Not everything is ‘ somebody’s’ fault.
I agree that pollution is poisoning the earth though and that can be proved without doubt. And that is all if our’s fault.
G.T.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top