London climate-change street protest arrests reach 290 on second day

[RickBradford]

I'm sure you know more about trigger warnings and safe spaces than I do; after all, they're an SJW invention.

 

Use whatever words you like; I just wanted to make you aware of the unpleasant connotation of the word 'denier' as it may come in handy if you are thinking of using it with someone less tolerant than myself.

[bristolboy]

19 hours ago, Catoni said:

    All you have to do is look at their banners and signs and the pamphlets they hand out. You see signs calling for the downfall of capitalism ...claiming climate change/Global Warming was caused by capitalism.

       You see signs calling for socialism as the answer to the “problem” of climate change (formerly Global Warming). 

   Almost every climate activist has either accepted the propaganda due to ignorance of the history of climate on this planet (Paleoclimatology...yes I’ve completed a basic study of it), or is a far left lib/socialist/Marxist-Leninist. 

    Just go to some of their demonstrations in any major western city. They don’t even hide that fact anymore. 

    Do you “deny” it? 

I did an image search on google. I daw lots and lots and lots of signs. Not one calling for the downfall of capitalism. Maybe time for you to visit an optometrist?

And do you feel betrayed now that the capitalists are deserting you to join the tree huggers?

[Chomper Higgot]

8 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

I did an image search on google. I daw lots and lots and lots of signs. Not one calling for the downfall of capitalism. Maybe time for you to visit an optometrist?

And do you feel betrayed now that the capitalists are deserting you to join the tree huggers?

Even if you found one such sign, ten, or a hundred.

 

That would not be evidence that each and everyone of the thousands taking part in the protest subscribe to some unified philosophy.

 

We can however draw conclusions on Catoni's points of view from the comments he makes. 

 

I wouldn't ascribe such a bag of prejudicial views a philosophy, but I am sure they have meaning to him.

 

[Chomper Higgot]

15 minutes ago, RickBradford said:

I'm sure you know more about trigger warnings and safe spaces than I do; after all, they're an SJW invention.

 

Use whatever words you like; I just wanted to make you aware of the unpleasant connotation of the word 'denier' as it may come in handy if you are thinking of using it with someone less tolerant than myself.

(Trigger Warning)

 

You do raise a valid question though.

 

Do 'Climate Change Deniers' also subscribe to other crack pot 'denials' and conspiracy theories to a larger extent than people who are not 'Climate Change Deniers'?

 

 

 

[RickBradford]

^^^

You should read  “NASA Faked the Moon Landing – Therefore (Climate) Science is a Hoax” , Lewandowsky (2013).

 

You should also read the numerous responses to the paper from the broader scientific community.

[dick dasterdly]

What triggered this latest round of protesters?

 

Genuine question, as whilst I agree with them it came out of 'the blue'?

[Chomper Higgot]

12 minutes ago, RickBradford said:

^^^

You should read  “NASA Faked the Moon Landing – Therefore (Climate) Science is a Hoax” , Lewandowsky (2013).

 

You should also read the numerous responses to the paper from the broader scientific community.

I wasn't expecting you to provide positive confirmation, well not so soon anyway.

[Chomper Higgot]

5 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

What triggered this latest round of protesters?

 

Genuine question, as whilst I agree with them it came out of 'the blue'?

https://rebellion.earth/international-rebellion/

 

It's an international protest scheduled by the organisers to commence on the 15th of April and run over 'several days'.

 

 

 

[RickBradford]

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

I wasn't expecting you to provide positive confirmation, well not so soon anyway.

Yes, the paper provides positive confirmation that activists will completely ignore science and scientific procedure in order to 'prove' their point that climate zealots are right and everyone else is an idiot.

 

It confirms the bad faith in which many of these activists engage.

 

[dick dasterdly]

5 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

https://rebellion.earth/international-rebellion/

 

It's an international protest scheduled by the organisers to commence on the 15th of April and run over 'several days'.

 

 

 

My mistake as I don't follow much of the news nowadays.

 

Have other countries been affected by these protests?

 

I know France has recently had the news changed by the destruction of Notre Dame, when previously the population had been concerned about their politicians - but its probably coincedental that the news has also changed in brit. to 'protesters concerned about environmental change'.

[RickBradford]

The hypocritical virtue signalling by the protesters in London has reached a new high, with the celebrity actress Emma Thompson joining the climate protest declaring that she "wants to be arrested" to show her commitment to the environment.

 

This selfless dedication to the climate cause might have carried more weight had she not flown all the way from Los Angeles to join the protest.

 

As The Telegraph put it: "If any satirists wanted to mock the green movement, they could not have come up with anything more absurd than this week’s infantile protests in London."

 

Climate alarmism always tends to come with a Big Gulp of hypocrisy.

 

 

[bristolboy]

On 4/18/2019 at 11:50 AM, RickBradford said:

Yes, the paper provides positive confirmation that activists will completely ignore science and scientific procedure in order to 'prove' their point that climate zealots are right and everyone else is an idiot.

 

It confirms the bad faith in which many of these activists engage.

 

More alarmist hysteria from soft-headed socialistic climate change activists:

The world's largest investor says a $3.8 trillion market faces growing climate-change risk

• Climate change threatens an increasingly large part of the $3.8 trillion US municipal bond market, the asset manager BlackRock warned.
• The firm analyzed the economic impact of climate change-related risks — like flooding and hurricane-force winds — could have at a local level in the coming years.

"Climate-related risks already threaten portfolios today, and are set to grow, we find," strategists at the BlackRock Investment Institute wrote in a report this week, honing in on the massive US municipal bond market could face as the planet warms. 

https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/climate-change-risk-to-38-trillion-municipal-bond-market-blackrock-2019-4-1028123832

[RickBradford]

And even more alarmist hysteria from soft-headed socialistic climate change activists:

 

Extinction Rebellion, the "brain-dead eco-snobs" (Telegraph) leading the London protests, want a civil disobedience campaign demanding that governments declare an ecological emergency over climate change, eliminate all greenhouse gas emissions by 2025, halt biodiversity loss and be led by new "citizens' assemblies on climate and ecological justice". 

 

People are heartily sick of these self-indulgent entitled fools claiming to be victims and going around "demanding" this and that (in between their yoga sessions and theatrical productions, of course).

 

As always with the Green/Left, it's hard to tell parody from the real thing.

[bristolboy]

1 minute ago, RickBradford said:

And even more alarmist hysteria from soft-headed socialistic climate change activists:

 

Extinction Rebellion, the "brain-dead eco-snobs" (Telegraph) leading the London protests, want a civil disobedience campaign demanding that governments declare an ecological emergency over climate change, eliminate all greenhouse gas emissions by 2025, halt biodiversity loss and be led by new "citizens' assemblies on climate and ecological justice". 

 

People are heartily sick of these self-indulgent entitled fools claiming to be victims and going around "demanding" this and that (in between their yoga sessions and theatrical productions, of course).

 

As always with the Green/Left, it's hard to tell parody from the real thing.

And as always with the shrinking band of global warming deniers. you'll do anything to deflect from the fact that serious hard headed people with trillions of dollars to invest and protect, think global warming and its damaging consequences are very real threats indeed.

[RickBradford]

2 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

And as always with the shrinking band of global warming deniers. you'll do anything to deflect from the fact that serious hard headed people with trillions of dollars to invest and protect, think global warming and its damaging consequences are very real threats indeed.

Are you really that naive?

 

Of course these large financial corporations are going to hype up the risks of damage from climate change. They can't lose. Banks can put up lending rates, re-insurers increase premiums, investors protect themselves against accusations of negligence. This is just capitalist business as usual.

 

One of the biggest corporate alarmists is a very serious hard-headed company called Munich Re, which scarcely lets a month go by without a dire assessment of our climatic future. There is considerable upside and no downside to their statements. They do what they do best; blow with the wind and protect shareholder value.

 

I thought that you might have developed a rather more skeptical view of the activities of large international corporate entities.

[bristolboy]

19 minutes ago, RickBradford said:

Are you really that naive?

 

Of course these large financial corporations are going to hype up the risks of damage from climate change. They can't lose. Banks can put up lending rates, re-insurers increase premiums, investors protect themselves against accusations of negligence. This is just capitalist business as usual.

 

One of the biggest corporate alarmists is a very serious hard-headed company called Munich Re, which scarcely lets a month go by without a dire assessment of our climatic future. There is considerable upside and no downside to their statements. They do what they do best; blow with the wind and protect shareholder value.

 

I thought that you might have developed a rather more skeptical view of the activities of large international corporate entities.

First off, I cited Blackrock. Did it escape your notice that it's not an insurance company? It's an investment house. The biggest in the world.

 

And as for insurers jacking up rates...That's because there's no competition among insurance companies? They're all in some kind of conspiracy to drive up rates? What are you? Some kind of socialist? Or just someone who, when the evidence is massively against him, comes up with a conspiracy theory. Any evidence for that? There's definitely an inverse relationship between the amount of evidence someone can cite and the likelihood that they will invoke conspiracy theories.

[VincentRJ]

1 hour ago, bristolboy said:

"Climate-related risks already threaten portfolios today, and are set to grow, we find," strategists at the BlackRock Investment Institute wrote in a report this week, honing in on the massive US municipal bond market could face as the planet warms. 

https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/climate-change-risk-to-38-trillion-municipal-bond-market-blackrock-2019-4-1028123832

Climate is always changing, whether good or bad for a particular species at a particular location. Civilizations in the past have collapsed due primarily to a change in climate which they were not able to adapt to.

 

We now have the technology and energy resources to adapt. We have the knowledge of the history of past, extreme weather events, but instead of adapting, we prefer to control the climate, foolishly thinking that we can use CO2 levels as a control knob.

 

I've mentioned before, in the summary of the physical sciences (Working Group 1) in the 5th assessment report from the IPCC, there is low confidence that extreme weather events have been increasing since 1950.
However, heat waves are another issue. In a warming climate it is to be expected that heat waves will increase, especially in the cities where most people live, because of the Urban Heat Island effect. To combat heat waves (that is, adapt to them), we need a reliable source of affordable electricity.

 

To protect ourselves from floods, droughts, and cyclones, we need lots of cheap energy to build dams, long water pipes, and sturdy housing and infrastructure.

 

https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/syr/AR5_SYR_FINAL_All_Topics.pdf

 

Since I'm not allowed to make lengthy quotes on this site, I'll just quote the relevant sentences from page 50 of the above link, regarding extreme weather events.

 

"There is low confidence that anthropogenic climate change has affected the frequency and magnitude of fluvial floods on a global scale.
There is low confidence in observed global-scale trends in droughts.
There is low confidence that long-term changes in tropical cyclone activity are robust, and there is low confidence in the attribution of global changes to any particular cause."

 

I'd also like to add another quote.

 

"With high confidence, floods larger than recorded since the 20th century occurred during the past five centuries in northern and central Europe, the western Mediterranean region and eastern Asia. There is medium confidence that in the Near East, India and central North America, modern large floods are comparable or surpass historical floods in magnitude and/or frequency."
 

This quote confirms that more extreme weather events have occurred in the past, before human emissions of CO2 were present.

[beautifulthailand99]

On 4/17/2019 at 2:41 AM, bert bloggs said:

Why dont they go and demonstrate in the countrys that are really polluting the world? China ,India , etc etc .

Why don't you go and live and holiday in your own country ?

[beautifulthailand99]

On 4/18/2019 at 5:27 AM, Chomper Higgot said:

(Trigger Warning)

 

You do raise a valid question though.

 

Do 'Climate Change Deniers' also subscribe to other crack pot 'denials' and conspiracy theories to a larger extent than people who are not 'Climate Change Deniers'?

 

 

 

A lot subscribe to Trump = Good President ...nuff said as Stan Lee would have said......

[bristolboy]

10 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/syr/AR5_SYR_FINAL_All_Topics.pdf

 

Since I'm not allowed to make lengthy quotes on this site, I'll just quote the relevant sentences from page 50 of the above link, regarding extreme weather events.

 

"There is low confidence that anthropogenic climate change has affected the frequency and magnitude of fluvial floods on a global scale.
There is low confidence in observed global-scale trends in droughts.
There is low confidence that long-term changes in tropical cyclone activity are robust, and there is low confidence in the attribution of global changes to any particular cause."

 

I'd also like to add another quote.

 

"With high confidence, floods larger than recorded since the 20th century occurred during the past five centuries in northern and central Europe, the western Mediterranean region and eastern Asia. There is medium confidence that in the Near East, India and central North America, modern large floods are comparable or surpass historical floods in magnitude and/or frequency."
 

This quote confirms that more extreme weather events have occurred in the past, before human emissions of CO2 were present.

Glad to see that you respect the scientific authority of the IPCC. So on the unlikely chance that I can cite its confidence levels on the role that CO2 plays in global warming, climate change and ocean acidification, you of course will accept that. To do otherwise would be intellectually dishonest, right?

 

 

[bert bloggs]

5 hours ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

Why don't you go and live and holiday in your own country ?

why dont you post something intelligent?

[VincentRJ]

1 hour ago, bristolboy said:

Glad to see that you respect the scientific authority of the IPCC. So on the unlikely chance that I can cite its confidence levels on the role that CO2 plays in global warming, climate change and ocean acidification, you of course will accept that. To do otherwise would be intellectually dishonest, right?

 

No. It wouldn't be intellectually dishonest. Just the opposite in fact. Believing everything that a particular authority claims, is a type of religion.

 

Those of us who have an understanding and appreciation of the 'methodology of science', which requires repeated experimentation under controlled conditions which accurately represent the situation being examined, and which allows for experiments to be arranged which would falsify a particular theory if such a theory were in fact false, are able to distinguish between situations that would lend themselves to scientific certainty and those that don't lend themselves to scientific certainty because of the complexity of interacting forces, lack of accurate measurements, and the long time-scales involved.

 

When statements are made by so-called authorities, like, 'The pH of the oceans has remained constant for 14 million years', and,  'The current warming has been more rapid than at any time during the past 20 million years', yet the IPCC states they are not even sure if major and obvious events like hurricanes, floods and droughts have been increasing since 1950, then one has to wonder about the truth of the first two statements.

 

Do you really believe that scientists are able to divide a 14 or 20 million year period into 100,000 short periods of 150 years and accurately examine every one those periods using proxy records so that each period can be fairly and confidently compared to the current 150 year period where we've been using modern instruments to make direct measurements?

 

If using modern instruments cannot provide certainty about the frequency and severity of extreme weather events, then it's very unlikely that there can be any certainty about the role of rising CO2 levels as the main driver of the current change in climate, or that such changes will be harmful.

 

There are lots of studies which show that CO2 rises usually follow a warming period. There's a correlation but not necessarily a cause.
 

[Chomper Higgot]

13 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

Climate is always changing, whether good or bad for a particular species at a particular location. Civilizations in the past have collapsed due primarily to a change in climate which they were not able to adapt to.

 

We now have the technology and energy resources to adapt. We have the knowledge of the history of past, extreme weather events, but instead of adapting, we prefer to control the climate, foolishly thinking that we can use CO2 levels as a control knob.

 

I've mentioned before, in the summary of the physical sciences (Working Group 1) in the 5th assessment report from the IPCC, there is low confidence that extreme weather events have been increasing since 1950.
However, heat waves are another issue. In a warming climate it is to be expected that heat waves will increase, especially in the cities where most people live, because of the Urban Heat Island effect. To combat heat waves (that is, adapt to them), we need a reliable source of affordable electricity.

 

To protect ourselves from floods, droughts, and cyclones, we need lots of cheap energy to build dams, long water pipes, and sturdy housing and infrastructure.

 

https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/syr/AR5_SYR_FINAL_All_Topics.pdf

 

Since I'm not allowed to make lengthy quotes on this site, I'll just quote the relevant sentences from page 50 of the above link, regarding extreme weather events.

 

"There is low confidence that anthropogenic climate change has affected the frequency and magnitude of fluvial floods on a global scale.
There is low confidence in observed global-scale trends in droughts.
There is low confidence that long-term changes in tropical cyclone activity are robust, and there is low confidence in the attribution of global changes to any particular cause."

 

I'd also like to add another quote.

 

"With high confidence, floods larger than recorded since the 20th century occurred during the past five centuries in northern and central Europe, the western Mediterranean region and eastern Asia. There is medium confidence that in the Near East, India and central North America, modern large floods are comparable or surpass historical floods in magnitude and/or frequency."
 

This quote confirms that more extreme weather events have occurred in the past, before human emissions of CO2 were present.

Wot extreme weather events happened before so don’t blame climate change for them happening again?!

 

Doh!

[VincentRJ]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Wot extreme weather events happened before so don’t blame climate change for them happening again?!

 

Doh!

Very puzzling comment. Why would anyone blame climate change for being the cause of climate change? Do you blame yourself for getting older? The changing of climate is a natural and unavoidable process, just like your ageing is natural and unavoidable.

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

14 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

Very puzzling comment. Why would anyone blame climate change for being the cause of climate change? Do you blame yourself for getting older? The changing of climate is a natural and unavoidable process, just like your ageing is natural and unavoidable.

 

 

Yup and polluting my lungs with smoke would accelerate the process, which is why I don’t do it.

 

[VincentRJ]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Yup and polluting my lungs with smoke would accelerate the process, which is why I don’t do it.

 

Same here. I try to take care of my health. However, CO2 is not a pollutant. Didn't you know that? 

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, VincentRJ said:

Same here. I try to take care of my health. However, CO2 is not a pollutant. Didn't you know that? 

Let's put you in a sealed room with an engine running churning out CO2 and see how you get on. 

 

 

[VincentRJ]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Let's put you in a sealed room with an engine running churning out CO2 and see how you get on. 

 

Let's put you in a sealed room with an engine pumping clean water into the room, and see how you get on.

Is clean water a pollutant?

[beautifulthailand99]

4 hours ago, bert bloggs said:

why dont you post something intelligent?

why , oh why oh why.......I agree with David Attenborough. 2000 plus climate scientists plus Professor Brian Cox against some blokes on the internet googling some nutters and Trumpo. It's not an equal argument.

 

[Chomper Higgot]

38 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

Let's put you in a sealed room with an engine pumping clean water into the room, and see how you get on.

Is clean water a pollutant?

It is if you try breathing it.