I really like how this British journalist simply told the American politician that he doesn't know shit 😂😂 this type of boldness is needed in the US right now !!
Why do people not realize that millions in funding goes to "scientist" that agree. If they dare tell the truth, no more funding. That's why so many retired scientist admit the truth, how corrupt it is. The 1930's were BY FAR the hottest decade on record, do they say this? First alarmist said many hurricanes to come after Katrina, then an 8 year drought of hurricanes, and they change the narrative. Now if they have a level 3 hurricane they freak out. When will they be right?
BILLIONS, if not TRILLIONS, go to the entrenched energy powers and corporations. Pull out a calculator to figure how much larger those numbers are, and what gives a greater incentive to bullshit...
Ahmad, not very bright are you? Why hasn't anyone asked the question, if CO2 is such a threat, why has Japan, which signed the Paris Accord ,replaced it's nuclear power plants with coal fired power plants? What about the pipeline Germany is building from Russia to Germany to carry natural gas? Tells us about one of the power plants in England burning wood from the United States to produce electricity. What you are not smart enough to understand is we don't have a cost effective technology to replace fossil fuels. Why don't you tell us about all of the electric cars and busses being used in Europe to fight climate change. Tell us why the Paris Accord on climate change was voluntary reductions in CO2 emissions versus mandatory? The IPCC and those who believe this garbage science are a joke, you have no solution to economicslly reduce CO2 emissions but isn't it fun to pretend.
The best thing is, the politicians answer.. "I've investigated the claims an I find them wanting (I know more than them) from multiple viewpoints (word salad, which?) one of them is, what they propose to be done (not an argument for or against climate change - economics maybe) has much more deleterious effect on the planet and humanity (more word salad and BS, what do they propose? and how do you know what effects that'll have on the planet? humanity?) than the problem that they have identified (that's a straight up lie packed in more word salad wrapped in BS - the effects if no changes are made (> +4 C) is predicted to be disastrous, costing millions of lives, hunger, refugees and trillions of dollars if not a global economic breakdown)
One thing I don't get is that the upper echelon of the fossil fuel companies do know the truth. Many are geologists or have other scientific backgrounds so even while they're trying to deny the truth they know better. But unless somebody's building a huge starship that's going to take all the 1% to a new home somewhere, their grandchildren will also perish. How do they square that? Are they so soulless they can look at their grandkids and think "I don't give a fuck if you have a survivable planet. I got my Christmas bonus this year and that's all that matters." That just doesn't track for me. Sure, some people, like Chump, are that soulless and heartless. He only believes he's winning when he reduces all other competitors to rubble. He can't "just" win, he has to destroy his competitors as well. That's because he's a malevolent sociopath, just like his boss, Vladimir Putin. I've read several biographies of Putin, mostly how he came from obscurity as a low-level KGB case officer in East Germany, went back to Russia when Germany was united, found that nobody was minding the store, and became an oligarch. His rise to power is mostly very secretive, although the biographies discussed his mentors and compadres, as well as some of the scams he pulled to put himself in power. He was a clever fella and completely ruthless. He burned down a couple of apartment buildings (with the residents in them) to put the blame on some dissidents. Plenty of people knew that it was the secret police who were responsible and at first, told that story openly. After a few "disappeared," most of the others fell into line A few didn't and either were assassinated or escaped Russia and went to the West. Only to discover that Putin had bought his way into favor by bribing Rethugs who controlled most of the media.
The petroleum industry is behind the Global Warming hoax. They pay scientists very well to make obvious, natural occurrences seem like terrifying dystopian nightmares. Then, they funnel tax dollars into shell companies that put up half the money to its prescribed use. The other half is put aside as discretionary funds.
Well, and correct me if I'm wrong, I believe they are trying to find one. We actually are trying to move into a , type one or two I'm not quite sure which... Civilization. So, they have a national space station. They have found at least one that I know of that is very similar to earth. Intergalactic travel can only happen under a united and controlled community. I feel like I'm getting off topic...😅 Side note: that interviewer was fuckin that man up😂
I'm so sorry you are naive. I, too, was naive...much of my life. Corporations only care about profits. The top management want share holders to be happy. Their salaries and bonuses are based on share prices. They all know they will be retiring before everything goes to hell in a hand basket. They, like all Governments want only to KICK THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD. They are not good people, like the rest of us. Trust the Yellow Vests. They understand the truth.
The main part of the solution is fusion technology but the ITER project has had to put back its first switch on from 2022 to after 2050 because of under-funding. Solar and wind can help but they will never supply all of the electricity the world needs so we need to invest the money needed to get fusion working.
Really tell that to China and India. It's the west that is told to sacrifice industry in the face of the rising pollutants of the east. Doesn't make sense. Even if the US switched to just renewables it would not matter as the East is nut asked to do same
Les Law At the moment, china seems to be investing more in renewables than the us or anyone else in the world really. And India is also doing a lot more than one would think. Those are only your prejudices talking out of you. Everyone has to do something and right now it seems that the us is willing to do less every year.
very very screwed ! If we act full on ASAP we might survive this century (still the current predictions already show that 75% human population will die due to climate change by 2100 = that's within 80 years time!)
Wow! That Myron Ebell is a perfect example of Upton Sinclair's insightful quote: "It's difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his NOT understanding it."
@@markbot4286 No. The climate scientists base their conclusions on their research and data. The shills are part of various public relations campaigns designed to obfuscate the data and sew confusion & doubt about the research in the public's mind because the changes in policy (e.g. carbon taxes, caps, etc.) required to respond responsibly to the conclusions based on the scientists' research and data would cost the corporations the shills work for a lot of money. Insidious, but not complicated to understand. It's essentially the same model as the one the tobacco companies used through the 1960s-80s.
@@smstalter you mean like the hockey stick graph? According to the climate scientists 2019 was the year it was going to be 45C in January...do you still believe it's going to be 45C in a month and a half? And if not can you at least admit climate scientists are not absolutely infallible?
@@markbot4286 Climate scientists are human, and thus individually fallible. That is why you must look at the preponderance of evidence - not from a few cherry-picked studies that support your existing viewpoint, but from the overall body of evidence that accumulates with more and more good data and research. That evidence paints a picture of ever higher statistical probability (over 98% of credible climate scientists concur) that the climate is warming and that CO2 from industrial human activity is the significant cause. As for 45 C, Southern California has already had a few days like that this year and last, as I'm sure other parts of the country have seen. It's becoming more common, in line with climate scientists' predictions.
@@smstalter 20 years ago they wanted to destroy the economy based on that hockey stick graph. The cry was NOW NOW NOW WE NEED TO ACT NOW!!! But we didn't destroy the economy based on a hockey stick graph. And time proved us right the graph was based on bad science. And it has never been 45C in January any where in California. Their predictions have never been right. But don't worry your pretty little head by 2030 electric cars will make petrol obsolete.
I thought the interview with the American guy made him look as ridiculous as he is which was good. The other two guests were disappointing. There was no urgency from them, they assumed we would do what's needed despite all the evidence saying we're not. This isn't going to be solved by consumers making better choices, governments including ours around the world have to make it happen and hold those that don't to account. How about an #ecocide law where we can take some of these crooks in charge of our country and others to account.
This entire subject is full of political rhetoric. My cynical and humorous guess is it's 89% Political Rhetoric, 10% Scientific Rhetoric, and 1% Science.
And think, when shit gets really bad were gonna jack their water and most likely win. Selfish I know but living in a superpower nation we'll at least have drinking water
Correct, it is the poorer nations that is causing global warming. The deserts are increasing in these poorer nations because of incorrect cattle grazing. They are destroying their lands, they don't realise they are doing it. People blame global warming because of carbon increase, its not correct. Carbon increase is because trees and plants are being destroyed in the poor nations. Anything the BBC reports, you learn its all lies.
"We need to convince the leaders of India and Africa to stop using coal." India accounts for 8% of the world's carbon emissions, Africa accounts for less than 3%. The US on the other hand is responsible for 15% of carbon emissions worldwide, second only to China at 28%
Just wait till those places get a taste for air conditioning. US is tapped out on first time new AC Units sold. China is just entering the market with 1.5 Billion billion and India with 1 billion people. The US is currently leading the world in carbon reductions while China is the world leader in AC units sold even though AC is considered rare in China. So if you look at the trends US is leading the pack in reduction while the largest population countries are the new untapped market for AC. Those countries want to be 1st world nations with their own consumer base just as the US was in the 50s and 60s. Africa is a continent. 80% of the population does not have electricity while they are one of the top 5 coal global exporters. Africa is poor. They need to export it just to survive. Africa is becoming the next China for China and the world as the new production hub for cheap goods. As Africa becomes a continent of greater wage earners they will become a consumer of the cheap available coal. Three hundred million people in the US have AC. 3 Billion people want it. So if the US stopped all CO2 emissions, there is still no stopping it.
@@MrAussieJules it wasn't a main driver before, but then again, there were no humans around then either.. It actually is the main driver in this scenario, because another warming effect to melt ice and release carbon is not needed when humans do it instead. If you don't believe in global warming ask yourself this : 1. What is it that makes you believe what you believe. 2. What would it take to convince you otherwise? 3. If presented with the evidence you stated under 2,would you actually change your mind? Remember, there is no such thing as an unfalsifiable claim 😉
Remember to adjust for the number of people living in China and the USA. Otherwise you could argue that USA only emits 15% of greenhouse gasses, its the rest of the world that's to blame. 😉
You´re talking about the climate change issue, and you come up with Myron Ebell? Really? Ok, I can see the temptation to go for the low hanging fruit. But, like Lawson, Myron Ebell is beyond ridiculous. There comes a point, Newsnight, where you stop inviting the Flat-Earthers to throw in their two bits. It´s a sphere, get over it, move on.
Agreed. As far as I'm concerned, impartiality and 'telling both sides' doesn't mean giving air time to liars as well as people who tell the truth. There is no 'other side' when it comes to the issue of climate change. The academic consensus is that climate change is a very real problem. Those who argue otherwise are overwhelmingly crackpots who have no relevant expertise.
Captain Andy Yep. You might as well invite on creationists or faith healers. Except science deniers on this topic are far far more toxic, irresponsible and dangerous.
I actually found his contribution both relevant and instructive because he's the closest thing they could get to the current US government's view on the issue. My issue is that if the BBC are serious about covering climate change then they need to devote more than 15 mins to it!
Ebell's scientific views are irrelevant (and the interviewer was correct to interrupt his attempts to offer them). However, his opinion about the reaction of the Trump administration is relevant. However, I do think they should've led with a discussion about the report rather than him.
Ask yourself a very simple comparison question. What's more important....A human concept called "economics' ? Or a system that gives life too life, called the ecosystem? Which is fact. CHOOSE!
I love the U.S., grew up there. But really, a lot of Americans are very selective of the science they follow. Tell them that there's a new pill to enhance IQ, learn 20 languages, loose 20kg in weight in 5 hours #SCIENCEAPPROVED (even though there's just a small study by a team who's just getting started), and look at the aisles empty over night. Tell them there's a general consensus on the science of climate change and its dangers, and see them suddenly become very skeptical and very "rigorous" and responsible about the things they listen to and follow. The extreme double standards are simultaneously hilarious and depressing. Those people don't follow science, they follow a fetish.
I understand your point and im not disagreeing with you but i think its important to realise science isn’t about how many people agree, its about proof. There was a census that the earth was flat at one point, and that was wrong. Census doesnt decide science. Just thought id point that out
Yurigan Smith Thanks for your contribution, while not disagreeing with your premise, its important to note that my initial point still stands, The Op’s logic is flawed in that he agrees to the notion of climate change on the basis of census and not un-refutable data. If he were to say “it is clear that the climate is changing, and scientific evidence points towards humans being a leading cause to its drastic increase” it would paint the same picture but in a more accurate representation :)
Yes Kerry, that could be what it might take. But naturally, it would have to be an organized, global, attempt or it has little chances of working, and there needs to be a plan to keep people going on the alternatives while they are at it. It's terrifying but we are utterly, insanely, dependent on petroleum products, it's not just, the oil alone. That's the very sad thing about it. My Best. Out.
@J H : But people like him/me are not in the wrong, though. This only, emphasizes the insane, over dependence we all, have toward this product. To the point I'm not sure anyone is trying hard enough, to find ways to help us get off of it completely. I find myself in a similar position when it comes to animal cruelty, and people trying to get away from consuming animals as a food stuff. Even if, I succeed in not eating meat at all, for extended periods of time, which I have, I'm still, faced with the dilemma that I wear shoes that are made of animal by-products. I have a cat, and I'm forced to feed her meat, even if, I've stopped eating it myself. You start off with the best of intentions then begin to realize HOW MUCH, these things are woven into every, single, little and minute aspect of our lives. Still, that should not stop us from trying though. My Best. Out.
As a Floridian and a Political Science graduate.. I can only say that yes climate change is certainly occurring and affecting us here and that politics have poisoned and bifurcated the country of the United States.
Almost all of Florida is at sea level, it will be gone before 2050 with rising sea levels. Rising humidity levels will also make the southern US unfit for human life, even a perfectly healthy human body starts to shut down in a 100% humidity environment at 35+°C.
If we didn't have capitalism screwing everything up! Cost shouldn't even be a considering factor when addressing the future and wellness of our survival.
True capitalism would be solving the problem. US Capitalism is now constrained by oligarchy. The same is true of most of our world. Our grandchildren will despise our existence!
@@MrDouglasSawyer I actually completely agree with you that capitalism (there is no such thing as US capitalism btw) is getting screwed over by the oligarchy Douglas. Problem is we have gone through regulating and deregulating MANY times. No need to repeat history again, thanks. We have known these problems existed within capitalism for a very long time since the days of Marx. My question to you is, if you want to stick with this horrible economic system, what would YOU do to bring about fairness and equality in capitalism so that we no longer have to see another oligarch in the future? My argument is that there is no such thing as true capitalism either, because it always ends in monopolies (and oligarchs).
@Aussie T-Sweet Im brainwashed?? WTF? I dont give a rats ass about your argument from authority! I have 2 comments for you ... 1) Who TF cares if Anthropogenic Global Warming is true or not, why would you not protect the Earth and our natural habitat, for the sake of protecting the Earth and our natural habitat?? Man-made or not, IS NOT THE ARGUMENT fool! 2) If you want to argue that fossil fuels do not impact the health and well being of humanity, I would have no problem with you wrapping your lips around my car tailpipe for a couple of minutes to prove my point! Do you know how much pollution is acceptable? ZERO! So dont give me that conservatard BS, yours is clearly a shit-where-you-eat ideology! ... and you dont have any fkn problem with that at all!! ... and you think you are educated? Dumbass.
If we did not have capitalism you would not have shared your criticism of it and you would not have watched this news story. There is a fair chance without capitalism, you, me and about 90% of humanity would not be alive today. Capitalism, which is free markets, which is freedom, more effectively provides prosperity than any form of authoritarianism.
Why do our world leaders continue to ignore this? My theory is that it's because or political systems are run by old people. People who only have a couple of decades left to live, at best. We need younger people in charge.
Can we please have more reports about this and about the wars, famine and global economic instability that will engulf us over the next century as a result of climate change please? We need more political will to solve this problem, and that needs more public awareness of how terrible everything is.
Climatologists have never taken into account that the greenhouse effect traps heat from all sources, natural industrial & domestic, not just solar. Hence the extinction of all mammalian life in less than 10 years Mother Nature’s Wrath - End of Days? Stuart Close: For those who believe no proof is necessary, for those who do not believe no proof is possible. Author: The genius of stupidity is that the stupid are too stupid to realise, that they are too stupid to be the geniuses; they stupidly assume themselves to be. The genius of intelligence is when the intelligent reach a point whereby they are so humbled in the face of the awe-inspiring intelligence and might of our Cosmic Mother Nature, as to realise... That, there is no such thing as to any one of us being a genius, for a proclivity toward genius, lies-only within the realms of the Genius and the Might of our Cosmic Mother Nature. Although Co2 and other GHG’s do form a greenhouse effect, this is an *effect* which is an *aggravating factor* it is not the source or the cause of global warming, which is *RETAINED: INDUSTRAL + COMMERCIAL + AGRICULTERAL + WILDFIRE + SOLAR HEAT*. What is never mentioned, is that billions of tons of hydrocarbons (black heat absorbing and radiating particles) which have and continue to be released into the atmosphere, which is the major factor in producing the *industrialised greenhouse effect*. And from a level of common sense, scientists should have realised, just as GHG prevent solar heat escaping into outer-space, they also prevent *heat from all sources* escaping into outer-space. Therefore it follows that it is the combined heat from the sun and from burning of billions of tons of fossil fuels and Trillions of litres of oil over a mere four centuries, that is the cause and driving force of global warming. Further Confirmation: Originally the Earth was a mass of molten rock lava which *despite being in the full glare sun for billions of years*, continued to cool down to a point, where an atmosphere and the oceans could form for life to evolve. And over the Earth’s lifetime and despite intermittent periods of climate change, there has never been a period where the Sun heated the Earth to such a level whereby life on the planet was threatened by extinction as it is now. Therefore, regardless of the lies and propaganda put around by the big Oil and Fossil Fuel Corporations, these factors determine beyond contention the greenhouse effect, and global warming are a man-made event. Disingenuous Climate Change Predictions From the mid late sixties when news of a possible greenhouse effect came to public attention, the scientific community (99.9% employed by corporations and governments) was outraged by the few among them, who had dared to publicly raise the issue. What followed was a concerted attack on the credibility of the dissidents, with scorn heaped on them and anyone who supported them. The controversy raged on over decades with the corporate owned media and government (s) gaining a greater say in the public arena. However, despite this, the evidence continued to mount accrue until the majority (97%) finally had to accept that they had been wrong. More than three decades was wasted, which could have been used to develop natural and renewable energy sources, instead of generations of climate change sceptics, and the increasing number of severe weather based tragedies we see occurring around the world now. And all of the wasted decades and years since then; spent making over-optimistic climate change predictions, because they still have not observed as any gardener tell them, that all heat (natural & manmade) produced in a greenhouse is subject to the greenhouses heat reflecting and retaining effect. Which means they are still operating under the delusion, that it is only solar heat that is being retained by the greenhouse effect, rather than in reality both solar and all manmade sources of heat. And it is why all of their predictions have been wrong, and their time-lines continue to get shorter and shorter. The only certain prediction that can be made is that global warming will continue to accelerate according to the increasing quantities of fossil fuels and oil that are being burned every day of the year. Which means; that humankind will continue to accelerate towards its extinction, according to the increasing quantities of fossil fuels and oil that are being burned every day of the year. And other heat sources e.g. Forest and Bush fires, thawing of permafrost’s, munitions of war, the rot and decomposition of biological matter etc. Useless International GHG Reduction Targets Given that the international monetary and share marketing system is based upon the value of the American petrodollar, which varies according to the price that OPEC and the American and British Oil Corporations charge the rest of the world for oil. Sidebar: The oil that OPEC and the American and British Oil Corporations obtain and sell they get for virtually nothing, as the overall costs of petroleum production are minuscule compared to the enormous profits they make, from selling oil to the rest of the world. Which why, America Saudi Arabia and Israel are using every militaristic and politically Machiavellian means, to stir up trouble in and between other oil producing nations. To prevent them from competing in the world oil market, as this would undermine the dominance of the American Black Gold Dollar. And that China India and developing nations have to use ever increasing quantities of oil to meet their energy requirements, there is no way that heat production and GHG emissions are going to diminish rather than increase at any time in the near future. The only means (and time is rapidly, or possibly has already run out?) by which life on Earth has any hope of survival, is for the whole of humanity to be faced with the truth. That if they do not cease their warring’s over oil and territories, and come together to cooperate and work together as one species, for the survival of all. What the Media Won't Tell You About the USA | reallygraceful - RUclips ruclips.net/video/1bNaupemo1g/видео.html What We Weren't Taught About Washington, D.C. | reallygraceful ... ruclips.net/video/cOLKoxTStwM/видео.html Zionism: Unmasked in 10 minutes | reallygraceful - RUclips ruclips.net/video/3WhyLjMKWsw/видео.html&vl=en What the Media Won't Tell You About Israel | reallygraceful - RUclips ruclips.net/video/KDRuOhLLta0/видео.html What the Media Won't Tell You About Saudi Arabia | reallygraceful ... ruclips.net/video/9m8FW9s8Jsg/видео.html Climate change is already irreversible - RUclips ruclips.net/video/dC7A9FHLreI/видео.html ADDITIONAL GLOBAL OVERHEATING FACTORS The Earth’s radius is approximately 6,371 km and its surface area is approximately 510 million square kilometres (196,900,000 square miles) with an average of 1,000 watts of solar energy per square metre. + Trillions of kilowatts of heat released into rivers and oceans from the motors, and the heated toxic effluents from hundreds of millions of washing machines, dishwashers, showers, baths, and sewage from toilets, every year. + Billions of kilowatts of heat released from hundreds of millions of tons of curing construction concrete, and brick and ceramic kilns every year. + Billions of megawatts of heat released from the exhaust gases of billions of vehicles, trains, shipping, aircraft, NASA rockets, and the munitions of war every year. + Billions of kilowatts of wasted heat released into rivers oceans and atmosphere from Nuclear power stations every year. + Trillions of kilowatts of wasted heat released from burning billions of tons of coal to convert oil and bitumen into industrial and domestic oils, diesel kerosene, petroleum, petrochemicals, pesticides, herbicides etc. + Trillions more kilowatts of wasted heat used to convert oil into plastic and mould it into billions of tons of plastic trash, that is choking and poisoning the life out of tens of billions of marine land and birdlife every year. + Trillions of megawatts of heat released from mining, and smelting billions of tons of iron and steel, to make trillions of tin cans, vehicles, trains, ships aircraft, industrial and domestic machinery etc. etc. etc. + Billions of kilowatts of heat released from oceanic acidification, and chemically reactive domestic and industrial effluents every year. + Billions of megawatts of heat released from fires used for land clearance, every year. + Billions of kilowatts of heat released from billions of decomposing trees and vegetation due to land clearance, every year (3.6 Billion trees that were felled in 2012 alone, an area the size of Germany). + Billions of megawatts of heat increase, due to the loss of shade and the cooling transpiration of billions of trees, due to land clearance. + The sum of the extra heat retained by the Greenhouse Effect; due to the release of the 50+% of water content from, e.g. the 3.6 Billion trees that were felled in 2012 alone + Billions of megawatts of solar and motor vehicle heat being absorbed by billions of acres of black asphalt roads, and concrete cities, and released by runoff rain into sewers, rivers, and oceans. + The sum of extra heat retained by the Greenhouse effect; due to billions of cubic metres of heat-absorbing and radiating hydrocarbons being released into the atmosphere every year. www.fromthecircletothesphere.net
@@carldalton9331 I'm not willing to read all that, except the first couple of sentences, as I don't have the time or inclination for large texts like that right now. If you believe that you know more about climate science than the climatologists, then I am almost certain that you are wrong. It is all very worrying though.
@rungus24, did you know that we currently live in an Ice Age? Have you ever studied history? Throughout human history cooling has led to difficulties, famines and societal collapses; while warming has led to prosperity. Climate has always changed and the "climate change" scam is upside-down, backwards and inside-out. Study the science and understand it, otherwise the politicians will rot your brain with their paid scientific "consensus."
@@RodMartinJr Have you studied the science? The actual scientists say something very different from what you're saying, so I'm sceptical about your views.
In 1982 the nephew of Sir Harry Pilkington of the glass fame had lunch with the owner of Fiat, Emilio Aurellio. Emilio offered the nephew a job and said "We are creating a huge global environmental problem that will frighten people into wanting a world government run by us". The nephew did not accept the job. Emilio was the president of the Club of Rome.
US here, I don't call any politician "our or my" I don't vote for the corrupted lot who work for the crown, and you don't speak for me. Unlike you I know the weather and climate is controlled and modified.
Most parts of the world see the sense in getting cleaner air and water. China, India and many other countries are making the USA and Australia look very slow indeed.
Let's take this to its logical conclusion. What's to stop the thugs from simply taking the newly redistributed funds for themselves? So not only did the people you wanted to help financially not get to keep their un earned wealth they also get to know the joys of ass rape and slavery....yay nope you talked me into it give me a FUCKING PEN where do I sign?
Oompa Loompa thinks Isis is another organic little group like Extinction Rebelloons and Greta Th.U.N.berg eh and our weather and climate isn't modified the white lines in the skies are accidental global dimming or we can just call them fairy trails. Yes suit you? I hope so.
Mark Bot not only marauders, but marauders who are led by a couple of people who are paid by big bankers & their big oil buddies at that, but wait it's better than that all whilst our weather and climate is modified and has been for decades. Doesn't even dawn on them that real grass root organization would NEVER get the main stream coverage these people get, hmm could it be an agenda? Grown up adults dressing like Bees and laying on the ground playing bloody dead as our Bees are being killed by Aluminum nano particles. Bees have no protection to acidified aluminum and develop Alzheimer’s like effects. They lose their ability to navigate, so we have bee colony collapse.
Seeing that we could use carbon capture technology, it is not irreversible. Seeing that the world had CO2 levels 10x higher in the past without runaway temperatures or disaster we don't even need to cut CO2. In fact, more CO2 is better for plants and food production, and more heat is better for cold areas and growing seasons.
@@zUJ7EjVD 1. The sun was not that much dimmer. Either way, your theory is more CO2, more heat, that would cause more CO2 out of the ocean which would cause more heat and so on until apocalypse. But that didn't happen in the past proving CO2 does not have much effect. 2. We don't need carbon capture, CO2 is not dangerous, but if it was carbon capture is an option scalable over decades. There is the trillion planting project going on right now which is basically carbon capture. 3. CO2 is carbon and oxygen so not sure what your point is there. Higher CO2 level makes plants need less water due to less evaporation of interior moisture of the plants. 4. More heat "may" reduce the utility of some land but will also increase the utility of some land. Worst case the ocean rises 2-3 feet by 2100. This is not a big problem for us highly adaptive humans. It will not flood enough land area to make a difference. There is advantages to more CO2 but likely disadvantages too. The question is what is the net effect and how much will it cost to do something about it? My advice is to study it and invest in better energy sources like nuclear fission and nuclear fusion.
@@zUJ7EjVD 1. The sun was dimmer and more CO2 may have helped trap more heat but that doesn't mean more CO2 now will translate into much more heat since there is a saturation effect. 3. Prove evidence plants are starving for water due to higher CO2. They are not. In fact, the planet is 15% greener today due to more CO2 proving most are getting enough water. 4. I heard that by 2100 climate change will cost about 4% of GDP but that is nothing since GDP is supposed to rise 400% by then so we will be much, much richer and it won't matter. The question is should we spend more than $100 trillion dollars over the next 80 years to have almost no effect on climate change (per the IPCC) to save a small portion of that 4% we didn't need anyway? Let me ask you this about who are the conspirators. Which is worse crying wolf when there is no wolf (what I believe the climate alarmist are doing) or crying no wolf when there is a wolf? Clearly, the worse is crying no wolf as people are being eaten by the wolf. Think about it. This is why climate alarmists don't mind scamming us (the harm only comes out of our wallet) but it would be inconceivable for climate scientists (and people like me) that say this is not a huge issue knowing that it is. If I believed CO2 was a real danger I would say so and I have researched the issue for many years. The best advice is to let technology deal with it over the decades to come. The answers are out there in the future but we don't have them now.
@@zUJ7EjVD Oh my. I was just going to compliment you on an interesting discussion and then you had to insult me just because you don't agree with me, sad. Make an argument next time to prove I am the ignorant one.
There is no place for ecology and sustainability under capitalism. Period. .Any kind of change without establishing this simple fact will be a facade...
"the scientists" you speak of are after money they lie to protect future funding for man made climate claims and predictions that keeps their bank accounts full
Not all of us Americans are deniers most certainly :) Your guest politician needs to speak for himself (and the administration it seems). (BTW....love how you dealt with him :) Keep asking the questions we need answers to and make them answer indeed! We are all in this together in my humble opinion and we need to all come together.
The problem is; We depend on the fiction of government being better than no government, actually working, with voting as a quality-control. Christians boast having no quality-control. The same god we know for a perfect record of doing nothing, is their servant for an unmeasurable number of prayers. The only difference between a Republican & Democrat is how fast the knee hits the floor when a donor walks in the room. There is no plan, not for greenhouse gases, as long as energy is needed to keep the show on the road.
@@RodMartinJr There are no sides in this because it is a global phenomenon, and all human lives currently depend on the stability of the global ecosystem. We are all in this together, or at least our descendents are. No one is advocating for cooling the planet. Some of us are advocating for slowing the rate of temperature increase to allow ecosystems time to adapt, so that we do not undermine the processes currently necessary for human survival.
deee, did you know that we live in an Ice Age? If the Holocene ends and those 2 "little" white things at the poles persist, we'll be in deep doodoo. Stability is increased by global warming!!! Study some climate science. Wind comes from temperature differences, and if the poles are nearly as warm as the tropics, then you'll have very mild winds. Your ignorance is huge! Look up former CIA Director John Brennan speaking at the Council on Foreign Relations, June 2016. There he talks about cooling the planet using S.A.I. Just because YOU don't know about it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Study your history. Look up the Greek Dark Ages (cooling period), post-Roman Medievial Dark Ages (cooling period) and the Little Ice Age (cooling period), where famines and societal collapses were far more common. And then look up their opposites: Minoan Warm Period, Roman Warm Period, Medieval Warm Period and the Modern Warm Period -- all periods of booming economies, large building projects, lots of food. Sides? There are facts and good interpretation on one side, and lies, half-truths and wrong interpretation on the other. I used to be on the wrong side for several years.
Humanity won't ever do anything about this until coastal cities start going underwater and by then it will be too late. We are hardwired only to respond to immediate threats.
Brandon S yea keep on being a good little parrot. or maybe google failed green predictions , there are many , many. co2 has nothing to do with climate change and would be better of higher or plant growth, see patric moore, greenpeace co founder.
@@MrAussieJules I find starting a debate with climate change deniers very taxing. Most of you are just a tick away from being as ignorant as flat earthers, so I send everyone to this video first: ruclips.net/video/OWXoRSIxyIU/видео.html It's only 7 minutes long yet refutes most of the typical climate change misconceptions you guys like to keep spewing out. If you can address what's brought up in that video with even a hint of non-elementary stupidity I'll reply to you, but you aren't off to a very good start. Btw I have a masters in chemistry and have been studying this topic for years so don't try to wow me with your piecemeal understanding of science.
Meanwhile the U.S. Navy is taking this very seriously. And M. Ebell, this is not about being pro or anti-energy. It's about the sources of energy and switching to renewables and sustainables.
"Renewables" are neither renewable or sustainable, their tied to OIL & they will die when oil dies. "Renewables" are just another way to PROFIT from the BURNING OF OIL! You cannot replace RESOURCES with TECHNOLOGY & "renewables" produce NONE of the ESSENTIAL RAW MATERIALS WE NEED! For example what technology can replace food & water? The answer is NONE! All technology is useless without RESOURCES!
@Richard Cowley Hahahahahha .....you are falling for the propaganda of the big energy companies. Think about it this way: What is simpler: Blades, Gearbox Generator, converter, a tower. Wind generator, thats all it really includes. Now look at a coal plant. Fuel handling, boiler, flue gas treatment, a high tower aswell, three stage turbine, generator, condenser, cooling pumps, cooling towers. Having to hire people, wind turbines don't need as many people. And having to buy fuel..........coal may still be cheaper if you have the plant right next to the mine, but if you ship it like in many places...nope. Wind is already cheaper, after only a few decades of development against a century old technology. Batteries are still too expensive, but ultra large scale battery storage is a field that has seen very little work so far.....not surprising at all ! Will happen within a decade or two. And none of this figures in the cost of pollution. If every power plant had to pay some money for every drought and hurricane that happens beyond the statistical average i suspect clean power would completely smash conventional.....
Yet the total CO2 output of the USA keeps shrinking..... While the total CO2 output of the EU countries, China & India all keep RISING, despite all the blowhard "green" talk.
@@joemonroe9456…. The USA is not bankrupt, the money is there, its just in the Bank accounts of the corporations. You are not being asked to take control, just to do your bit to reduce CO2.
co2 doesn't cause global warming. It such a small percentage that it has almost no effect on the atmosphere. That's why all of the predictions have failed. Watch some dissenting views. ruclips.net/video/8RwjYkYCXnU/видео.html@@Eric-ye5yz
@@joemonroe9456 LOL you and the guy on your vid dont know jack shit about physics or CO2. 1. CO2 is vital to life on Earth. Without it the average temperature would be around 0F (-18C) 2. Preindustrial average temperature was 57F (14C) at 280 ppm CO2. Lets do some math shall we? 14-(-18)=32C temp change so 32C/280 ppm CO2 = .1C/1 ppm CO2. Now lets see where we are going. Current concentration of CO2= 411 ppm. 411-280=131 ppm CO2 rise over preindustrial levels 131ppm*(.1C/1ppm)=13.1 C rise in temperature. now this approach doesnt take in some mitigating factors (actual temperature at this concentration would be about 4.5 warmer) but it is a good first order approximation of just how fucked we really are.
ADerpyRealty, try reading this report, the climate models are wrong! science.house.gov/sites/republicans.science.house.gov/files/documents/HHRG-115-SY-WState-JChristy-20170329.pdf
his is not REAL. WATTA FAKE SCIETIFIC PROOF THAT EVER EMERGED IN THE WORLD AS CLIMATE CHANGE. CLIMATE CHANGE IS A LIE, MANIPULATIVE, DECEITFUL and TWISTED NONSENSE. ALL THE DATA THT WERE PORTRAYED and DISPLAYED ARE FAKE and NOT SCIENTIFIC. IT'S ALL FAKE THE SAME AS GAY MOVEMENT. TO SAY NO COAL NO OIL STOP THAT CRAB. ALL THE SCIENCTISTS BEHIND THIS IDEA ARE NOT A SCIENTIST. ITS ALL FAKE and CRAB.. THEN WHAT ABORTION! OT CUT DOWN NUMBER OF MEN AND WOMEN BECAUSE OF CLIMATE CHANGE, TO DECREASE THE AMOUNT OF CARBON IN THE ATMOSPHERE!, AND THEN TO LEGALISE THE NONSENSE OF GAY MOVEMENT. DON'T YOU SEE THE LINK OF SUCH FAKE IDEOLOGIES and BELIEFS. FAKE SCHOOLS, FAKE TEACHERS, FAKE STUDENTS. FEEL SORRY FOR THE KIDS I MEAN IT THEY DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON.
and I am glad that I turned sixty this yearm so my time is running out, slowly. I just feel sorry for the younger generations, their lives will be tougher than mine. The only bright side I see is, hard times tend to produce better people. 'cause my generation is worthless. We screwed not just the biosphere but everything that comes after. We're going extinct but nobody seems to care
Wow you people have to be paid to say this insane crap that or your so very so ignorant to the fact this video showed you weaponized weather Modified controlled weather and you think it's nature otherwise all they did was attempt to make the American look like an ass, I know who the asses are.
@Time Code The only thing that has brought rapid societal change to the world (e.g. civil rights, suffrage, etc,) that of which is required for the climate crisis which we've put off for 30 years, is mass civil disobedience. Otherwise known as protest. We need the largest protest of all time simultaneously, all over the world.
@@climatecraze I'm very puzzled about how my comment from a few days ago has somehow become yours from a year ago. I don't know if I have you or RUclips to blame for this. I suppose you might want to claim it as the linked video is about someone who - arguably - took his concern for the fate of the planet (because of man-made global warming) too far. For the record, I (unlike you) accept the science that shows that the current warming _is_ due to human greenhouse gas emissions, and that it _will_ cause more and greater problems for humans and many other forms of life in the years to come.
@@climatecraze 0.04 degrees centigrade. The global average temperature for 2022 was 1.16 °C above the pre-industrial baseline; 0.04 °C warmer than the value for 2021.
@@ilikethisnamebetter That's about the total thermal increase. Earth has been thawing out from the Little Ice Age for about 300 years. What part of the 0.04 degree warming was due to the thawing warming?
Please everyone reading this turn off all your plug sockets, eat healthier, walk don’t drive, enjoy our planet and care for it 😭😭😭😭 before it’s gone....
Pablo. Yes you can lose brain cells when you attempt to use them. Conservatives use theirs, apparently, you do not. CO2 based climate change is a scam.
@@zUJ7EjVD "For C02 based climate change to be a scam would require a conspiracy of international scale." No. Conspiracies are not necessarily people getting together and making plans. The climate is changing, always, it is likely getting hotter due to coming out of an ice age and minimally due to higher CO2. The conspiracy is partly evil (sociopathic) people realizing there is money and power to be gained from the issue and their followers that are irrational, ignorant, or just want to be part of the movement. Everyone makes something off of fossil fuels. Do you put gas in your car? Can you afford to buy a Tesla and a solar array instead? Nope? Trillions (of your tax dollars) are pegged to be spent on climate change along with growing governmental power (like the green new deal). Oil companies do spend money to support their businesses and fight off the lies being told but it is in the millions not trillions. "The only scam here is you saying "conservatives use their brain cells"." ? Not an argument.
I like how they show smog and equate it to CO2, fires and equate it to CO2 and flooding and equate it to CO2. CO2 is not smog and is invisible. CO2 puts out fires. Flooding is due to water, H2O, not CO2. It would be more appropriate to show lush forests and greenhouses and equate it to CO2, showing a fire extinguisher full of CO2, and showing people breathing out CO2 since 18.5% of us are carbon. If carbon were a poison as some have said I would have 46 pounds of poison in my body. The next thing we will be told by our governments is that we need to die fat so they can bury the carbon and save the earth. It is obvious the interviewer is biased and has bought into the tax grab. He is not really an interviewer but a propagandist.
Yea they need to stop fucking about now! and giving these people platforms as if they have valid things to say. We need to forget the deniers and work at the task at hand.
And that Brownie Baroness isn't a politician? Worthington has been a Trustee at UNICEF since 2015 , UN_ICEF who has collected money since it's inception and has done little if anything for children? That woman doesn't know the weather and climate is engineered? Like hell she doesn't they all know, who doesn't know if the public.
The rate of warming according to Dr. Hansen and many climatologists is now very close to 0.2 C per decade. The IPCC is actually a very conservative body that doesn't make pronouncements without great analysis and introspection. If anything, the IPCC has consistently underestimated the rate of change as much of the data at the time of review is already several years old as the peer review process takes time. Also, the IPCC has consistently ignored the effects of methane (or at least underestimated emissions) as the data regarding the emission of methane from a variety of sources still is quite uncertain. Unquestionably, we are now in a state approaching many of tipping points that within this decade could very well propel the earth system into a more or less new state similar to that during the PETM.
He's quite right. Positive feedback forcings are very real, and most are ignored by the IPCC. The melting of arctic ice is the easiest and clearest to understand. The more dark ocean replaces white, reflective ice, the more sunlight is absorbed as heat. Others include warmth reaching a point where permafrost melts and releases methane, further heating the atmosphere. Methane clathrates in the ocean, heat causing deforestation or desertification, etc. There are many known, proven, factual positive feedbacks. There isn't a known tipping point, that's some godly level calculation to know what moment that would be, but there are known positive feedback effects. It's, again, not rocket science.
@Richard Cowley Dude, you haven't disproven greenhouse gases or the greenhouse effect yet. You want to try working with science, instead of quoting parts per statistics? There's a reason trace gases affect the atmosphere. The sun is the largest input, you're right. Greenhouse gases absorb radiant heat and reflect more back at the surface than the non-greenhouse variety. Do we agree on the basic physics? If we can agree on that I can help you learn why trace gases can raise the ambient temperature of Earth. Water vapor, by the way, as Tyndall predicted, is far and away the strongest greenhouse gas in our atmosphere.
@Richard Cowley A simpler question for you is this: Why is Venus, and not Mercury, the hottest planet in our solar system? Mercury is much closer to the sun, shouldn't it be much hotter than Venus?
@Richard Cowley I'm not sure if you're aware of this, so I'm going to have to say it. The laws of physics on Earth and the laws of physics on Mercury and Venus are the same laws of physics. Can we agree on that? If we can't, I can't help you. No one can. Assuming you have a basic grasp of reality, we'll continue: So your belief is that atmospheric pressure accounts for the temperature difference between Mercury and Venus? That's simply false. You're wrong, it hurts, but you're going to have to learn to live with it. You realize people around the world, with an understanding of physics you lack, have calculated what Venus' temperature would be without GHG? Can you do that? Can you calculate how much hotter it would be at 2G's of pressure than at 1? No, no you can't. Is your contention that the entirety of atmospheric science and optics for the past two centuries is nothing but a conspiracy? That's what you're contending. You can wiggle and dance around it all you want, you're still ignoring the truth staring you in the face. You prefer to believe disproven nonsense peddled by fossil fuel sponsored think tanks and general fundamentalist nut jobs. Learn the science and disprove it or just ignore it. Being ignorant of the science and trying to disprove it is folly.
@Richard Cowley Ooo, the Cambrian epoch is a good point. It *was* much hotter during the Cambrian than it is today, at least as far as we know. Roughly 15C hotter on average during the peak of those CO2 emissions, which by the by, do not lag temperature by eight centuries, that's just patently false. You would not want to live in a world resembling the Cambrian epoch.
that politician needs to step out of his Air conditioned D.C office, and into the boots of a Texas construction worker for the summer & I BET HE WOULD CHANGE HIS VIEW!
Unfortunately it looks like climate reality is developing even worse than the predictions, see for example the rate of ice loss in greenland and the antarctic. After these two very hot and dry summers that killed off massive amounts of corn and forests in Europe I think one of the next catastrophic events will be massive flooding of a coastal Mega City. Sadly mankind needs these incidents to sense the danger it is running into.
@@achenarmyst2156 I think you missed the point of the OC. wade5941 is saying that this is bs because it's just another prediction of catastrophy that will also be wrong, just like every other failed prediction in the past. 100% of which have been wrong.
gasoline is money for the government, alternative energy is not 100 % money for the government it's not just gasoline, theres : alcohol, tabbaco, entertainment, marijuana, medicine, and even the church payes the government alternative energy is a threat to politicians life style ! ! .
In fact people who have ignored real people telling you that weather and climate modification is real, are the complicit ones. And what you watched here was a script and an act.
@L. Johnson fair play. cooking method is significant too with carbon footprint. asparagus for example has huge footplant as far as veggies go. did you se that as well? suppose that you came across info that proved to you beyond doubt that animal agriculture was terrible for the planet, orders of magnitude worse than plants. would you go plant based?
@L. Johnson ok. to be honest, im not very interested in the ecology side of veganism. its too abstract and obscured -vested interests abound. as for nutrition, i can recommend having a look at Dr. Greger's book How Not to Die. id invite you to have a look at the documentaries Dominion (2018) and Earthlings if you havent already seen them. The point of watching them is to see if the production of meat aligns with what your own moral beleifs about non human animals.
It's a worry when they think that 50 billion is too much when it's the same as we spend on defence. What the point in spending on defence when millions are going to be effected by climate change
provide untampered, empirical evidence for any of these man made climate alarm claims and predictions that have been proven ? provide untampered, empirical evidence for money being taken as taxes, direct charges as having control over the climate ? provide untampered, empirical evidence for any politician as having control over the climate through laws, regulations and instruction to the population ? provide untampered, empirical evidence for mankind as having control over the climate and nature ? if CO2 is the culprit ;- What do you consider to be a safe level in ppm of CO2 for life on this planet ? each question to be answered seperately
To tell you the truth, the older you get the less you take notice of this. They were saying similar in the 60's, 70's, in the 80's they were saying seas would rise so much that Peterborough would be by the sea in 2000. Ive been fishing on the same beach since the 70's and the tide always comes up to the same place. They keep going on about floods, storms, hurricanes like they are something new. I think that their main concern is population growth, industrialisation and prosperity of the east, and that natural resources are not inexhaustible. We need to start weaning ourselves off of reliance on oil gradually and find alternatives, that's the truth of it.
you are right ..and never forget that there was a mile of ice over Peterborough 18,000 years ago . Vineyards in York, Thames freezing, Minoan warm period....Dont talk to me of 0.15 of a degree when no thermometers agreed to 2C more than 50 years ago..if they ever were used and covered the world with their daily readers.
Yep I have been around long enough too. We were carefree surfer kids in the eighties and were happy to know there would be more violent weather systems to make waves, which never happened. The opposite happened, decadal reduction in cyclones, and besides our sea level is just where it was then despite artist representations of how our town would be covered by sea water in 2001. But people don't realise how important the outcome of prediction is in science. They don't realise they are being led down a garden path by people who pay "scientists" to practice confirmation bias. Because when the facts dont fit a hypothesis they think the facts are wrong and try harder to look for reasons why they could be right. When predictions fail it directly condemns the fundamental explanation on which it rested. Its a classic scam driven by baseless fearmongering and argument from authority. Why? Not sure but I think it helps westerners to accept trade realities, that we can consume and produce in patterns that push wealth to the east. So the east modernises by making all the things we used to make. There is an obvious trade disparity there that is covered up by outsized deficit financing causing various asset bubbles in the west. I think the east will go through this same wind-down though at a future time. I think higher level international authorities have serious problems dealing with humanity and all its failings. I just wish we could start to tell the truth.
@jimmy goody Ther massive population increases sure make that reservoir lower... the Tigres and Euphrates ( et al) hardly get any water now..the Iranians and Turks snaffled it all over the border. As a result the Syrian and Iraqi kids have no jobs on the land and they cause trouble. Water is often the wider issue.
Essentially Jimmy, Iraq is a mixture of old tribalism ( fading now) Religious groups ( a few of them ) political parties ( plenty of them) and simply criminal gangs ( underestimated and masquerading as any of the other groups). The lack of water and the existence of 10 person familie....and a poor country to start with does not help at all.
How about you get 99 climate scientists arguing for man made climate change and one clown not in climate science arguing against. That would be way more representative than what you are trying to do here....
The comment about India and China is a bit misleading. India has one of the best climate change performances. China is medium. Canada, Australia , Japan are way behind. USA is at the very bottom.
A rare and refreshing comment about climate change. Thanks. China actually knows and follows climate science ... ruclips.net/video/b1Iu9D5RhqQ/видео.html
this report is junk , if you know of an extreme weather event that can be found to have been caused by human activity increasing co2 levels in the atmosphere then detail exactly how it occurred , and if you think these "scientists" are correct why has nobody created a mini climate in a lab ? if the models are all correct and the science is settled then it should be repeatable with matching results climate scientists know fuck all about what drives the weather on this planet , and the BBC are churning out propaganda in the belief it will bring more funding
@@philiphall4805 do you seriously believe what you have written or are you just a troll. The report is correct and I suggest you research more for yourself the maths and science is all out there.
@@charlieford5523 yes i do believe what i have written , the report is garbage , as is the science behind climate change , the mechanism has not been explained , not even close , nobody knows how hurricanes are formed , the conditions leading up to a hurricane are known but not exactly why some form and most do not , they know very little ask yourself this...........if given unlimited resources , could any of these climate scientists end a drought , or stop a flood ? I think not
Andrew Foden Remember the climate does not know it’s forming a hurricane or that there is a drought so there has to be a mechanism , which is unknown Check the IPCC website on how hurricanes are formed , the explanation is about 6 lines
With no ice more warming will occur even faster we are only a few years away. Stopping burning coal would allow sulphate particles to drop out of the air and cause a lack of global dimming to fuel temp rises by a further 1/2 a degree. 200 species a day are currently going extinct, we are on the list. Crops have failed in places already this year, how long before starvation of our hugely overshot population is normal. Methane release in the Arctic will make human releases of greenhouse gases seem slight. Nuclear power station take up to 60 years to decommission, we prob have about 10 left before our demise. Iam afraid we already left it too late and a 4+++ C rise cannot be stopped. The media and most scientists are still being conservative, just enjoy the time you have left.
"With no ice more warming will occur even faster" Not only that. Temperatures are already dangerously close to a point where methane trapped in permafrost will be released into the atmosphere in growing amounts. Methane is a more potent greenhouse gas than CO2. This could start a very dangerous feedback loop. EDIT: Ah frick, I should have clicked "Read more" before typing this comment.
Since the planet is cooling, I really wouldn't worry about it... We've been fed this bullshit for years and nothing has happened,no sea level rise, no ice melt.... Nothing g
Obama buys $15,000,000. Beachfront home. Not a single word of criticism. You know damn well if Trump Bought a $15,000,000 beachfront home The media would melt down
Sri Pranamya Budda I remember in 1972 in Los Angeles calif, the air was all YELLOW. Now the air is clean. It used to be way worse. The Indians in Los Angeles Calif back in 1500 before the white man arrived called Los Angeles, “the valley of the smoke.”
@@PInk77W1 Yes, we cleaned up air pollution in many cities, but we just exported it to other parts of the world. The air pollution in China and India is far worse than LA ever was--partly because we offshored our manufacturing there. Overall, we are rapidly driving the Earth towards ecosystem collapse. Take care.
Karl Wheatley I’ve ridden my bicycle across India and China. Had zero problem. I saw a lot of litter on the ground, but the air didn’t bother me once. I know my story is just one person.
I'm pretty sure people who take climate change seriously also say that we need to radically alter the consumption habits of everyone on earth. If we want to take climate change seriously we can't maintain a class society where greed and exploitation is rewarded.
Edith Callaway I won't outright call you racist because people on the internet seem to be extremely sensitive about this nowadays, but let's say that if I interpret your comment right, it's hella racist. And your statistics are way off, since race isn't a scientific concept it is hard to measure, but most of what I found ranges from 18-30% which makes our race at the very least the third largest
Tobias Zauzig My comment had nothing to do with "race". The point I am making is that there are too many people on this planet and our consumption of the earths resources is at an unsustainable level. One of two things will happen ; either we take steps to reduce our population, or "Nature" will do it for us, with what I anticipate will involve unimaginable suffering and destruction. It's that simple.
@@alanknight8439 why do you think I wrote that name at the beginning of my comment? My response was not directed at you, it was directed at Eddith Callaway.
When all the ice melts in Antarctica, the oceans will rise by about 400 feet. The calculation is easy to do: 1. The ice in Antarctica varies from 0.5 mile to 1.5 miles in depth (thickness). Assume a uniform thickness of one mile (5280 feet). Antarctica land mass covers 5% of the surface area of the Earth. The oceans cover about 66% of the surface area of the Earth. So: 5280 x .05 = "Y" x .66 Where "Y" is the sea level rise in feet "Y" = 400 feet.
The amount of reforestation needed to effectively counter climate change is so massive that it would interfere with global capitalism. So there is no chance of following your advice if we don‘t reform our economic system.
Mike David great option mike I live in rural England and I have seen almost all the green belt lost to houses animal habitat gone my village is surrounded by cheap houses. We have raped this earth for decades reckon we deserve what’s coming.
YES JAMES! NOW YOU'RE TALKING! This is the sickening thing about the U.S. for outsiders; all those trillions spent on defense could actually CREATE, WHOLE NEW, CLEAN ENERGY INDUSTRIES! You could both, go green and maintain a strong economy while you are at it. WHAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH THESE BASTARDS ANYWAY??!! My Best. Out.
I really like how this British journalist simply told the American politician that he doesn't know shit 😂😂 this type of boldness is needed in the US right now !!
Why do people not realize that millions in funding goes to "scientist" that agree. If they dare tell the truth, no more funding. That's why so many retired scientist admit the truth, how corrupt it is. The 1930's were BY FAR the hottest decade on record, do they say this? First alarmist said many hurricanes to come after Katrina, then an 8 year drought of hurricanes, and they change the narrative. Now if they have a level 3 hurricane they freak out. When will they be right?
BILLIONS, if not TRILLIONS, go to the entrenched energy powers and corporations. Pull out a calculator to figure how much larger those numbers are, and what gives a greater incentive to bullshit...
Ahmad, not very bright are you? Why hasn't anyone asked the question, if CO2 is such a threat, why has Japan, which signed the Paris Accord ,replaced it's nuclear power plants with coal fired power plants? What about the pipeline Germany is building from Russia to Germany to carry natural gas? Tells us about one of the power plants in England burning wood from the United States to produce electricity. What you are not smart enough to understand is we don't have a cost effective technology to replace fossil fuels. Why don't you tell us about all of the electric cars and busses being used in Europe to fight climate change. Tell us why the Paris Accord on climate change was voluntary reductions in CO2 emissions versus mandatory? The IPCC and those who believe this garbage science are a joke, you have no solution to economicslly reduce CO2 emissions but isn't it fun to pretend.
The best thing is, the politicians answer.. "I've investigated the claims an I find them wanting (I know more than them) from multiple viewpoints (word salad, which?) one of them is, what they propose to be done (not an argument for or against climate change - economics maybe) has much more deleterious effect on the planet and humanity (more word salad and BS, what do they propose? and how do you know what effects that'll have on the planet? humanity?) than the problem that they have identified (that's a straight up lie packed in more word salad wrapped in BS - the effects if no changes are made (> +4 C) is predicted to be disastrous, costing millions of lives, hunger, refugees and trillions of dollars if not a global economic breakdown)
ibrahim ahmad: you and stupid England need to STFU after colonizing the world, then acting all innocent.
money should not cause the death of the world there is no other planet for us
One thing I don't get is that the upper echelon of the fossil fuel companies do know the truth. Many are geologists or have other scientific backgrounds so even while they're trying to deny the truth they know better. But unless somebody's building a huge starship that's going to take all the 1% to a new home somewhere, their grandchildren will also perish. How do they square that? Are they so soulless they can look at their grandkids and think "I don't give a fuck if you have a survivable planet. I got my Christmas bonus this year and that's all that matters." That just doesn't track for me. Sure, some people, like Chump, are that soulless and heartless. He only believes he's winning when he reduces all other competitors to rubble. He can't "just" win, he has to destroy his competitors as well. That's because he's a malevolent sociopath, just like his boss, Vladimir Putin. I've read several biographies of Putin, mostly how he came from obscurity as a low-level KGB case officer in East Germany, went back to Russia when Germany was united, found that nobody was minding the store, and became an oligarch. His rise to power is mostly very secretive, although the biographies discussed his mentors and compadres, as well as some of the scams he pulled to put himself in power. He was a clever fella and completely ruthless. He burned down a couple of apartment buildings (with the residents in them) to put the blame on some dissidents. Plenty of people knew that it was the secret police who were responsible and at first, told that story openly. After a few "disappeared," most of the others fell into line A few didn't and either were assassinated or escaped Russia and went to the West. Only to discover that Putin had bought his way into favor by bribing Rethugs who controlled most of the media.
The petroleum industry is behind the Global Warming hoax. They pay scientists very well to make obvious, natural occurrences seem like terrifying dystopian nightmares. Then, they funnel tax dollars into shell companies that put up half the money to its prescribed use. The other half is put aside as discretionary funds.
avacodo omg thank you
Well, and correct me if I'm wrong, I believe they are trying to find one. We actually are trying to move into a , type one or two I'm not quite sure which... Civilization. So, they have a national space station. They have found at least one that I know of that is very similar to earth. Intergalactic travel can only happen under a united and controlled community. I feel like I'm getting off topic...😅
Side note: that interviewer was fuckin that man up😂
I'm so sorry you are naive. I, too, was naive...much of my life. Corporations only care about profits. The top management want share holders to be happy. Their salaries and bonuses are based on share prices. They all know they will be retiring before everything goes to hell in a hand basket. They, like all Governments want only to KICK THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD. They are not good people, like the rest of us. Trust the Yellow Vests. They understand the truth.
Investing 2.5% of our economic output into saving the world from disaster seems to be a pretty reasonable price.
A Google User Unfortunately greed decides the future. It is reasonable, but unfortunately we likely have little control over it all.
The main part of the solution is fusion technology but the ITER project has had to put back its first switch on from 2022 to after 2050 because of under-funding. Solar and wind can help but they will never supply all of the electricity the world needs so we need to invest the money needed to get fusion working.
Yes, the lack of funding for fusion research is really sad.
Really tell that to China and India. It's the west that is told to sacrifice industry in the face of the rising pollutants of the east. Doesn't make sense. Even if the US switched to just renewables it would not matter as the East is nut asked to do same
Les Law At the moment, china seems to be investing more in renewables than the us or anyone else in the world really. And India is also doing a lot more than one would think. Those are only your prejudices talking out of you. Everyone has to do something and right now it seems that the us is willing to do less every year.
Dude do you realize how screwed we are? Most people don’t care about the environment at all.
very very screwed ! If we act full on ASAP we might survive this century (still the current predictions already show that 75% human population will die due to climate change by 2100 = that's within 80 years time!)
Why do you care?
Yeah, like you.
George George Source ?
Fuck the environment what has it ever done for us?
Wow! That Myron Ebell is a perfect example of Upton Sinclair's insightful quote: "It's difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his NOT understanding it."
Like the climate scientists?
@@markbot4286 No. The climate scientists base their conclusions on their research and data. The shills are part of various public relations campaigns designed to obfuscate the data and sew confusion & doubt about the research in the public's mind because the changes in policy (e.g. carbon taxes, caps, etc.) required to respond responsibly to the conclusions based on the scientists' research and data would cost the corporations the shills work for a lot of money. Insidious, but not complicated to understand. It's essentially the same model as the one the tobacco companies used through the 1960s-80s.
@@smstalter you mean like the hockey stick graph? According to the climate scientists 2019 was the year it was going to be 45C in January...do you still believe it's going to be 45C in a month and a half? And if not can you at least admit climate scientists are not absolutely infallible?
@@markbot4286 Climate scientists are human, and thus individually fallible. That is why you must look at the preponderance of evidence - not from a few cherry-picked studies that support your existing viewpoint, but from the overall body of evidence that accumulates with more and more good data and research. That evidence paints a picture of ever higher statistical probability (over 98% of credible climate scientists concur) that the climate is warming and that CO2 from industrial human activity is the significant cause. As for 45 C, Southern California has already had a few days like that this year and last, as I'm sure other parts of the country have seen. It's becoming more common, in line with climate scientists' predictions.
@@smstalter 20 years ago they wanted to destroy the economy based on that hockey stick graph. The cry was NOW NOW NOW WE NEED TO ACT NOW!!! But we didn't destroy the economy based on a hockey stick graph. And time proved us right the graph was based on bad science. And it has never been 45C in January any where in California. Their predictions have never been right. But don't worry your pretty little head by 2030 electric cars will make petrol obsolete.
I thought the interview with the American guy made him look as ridiculous as he is which was good. The other two guests were disappointing. There was no urgency from them, they assumed we would do what's needed despite all the evidence saying we're not. This isn't going to be solved by consumers making better choices, governments including ours around the world have to make it happen and hold those that don't to account. How about an #ecocide law where we can take some of these crooks in charge of our country and others to account.
100%
There is no evidence that Co2 drives temperature in the first place. stop being a lazy sheep.
The phrase ‘pro energy’ is political rhetoric.
This entire subject is full of political rhetoric. My cynical and humorous guess is it's 89% Political Rhetoric, 10% Scientific Rhetoric, and 1% Science.
Climate Change • political rhetoric
Global Warming • political rhetoric
Climate crisis • political rhetoric
Paris Accord • political rhetoric
„Pro energy“ is pure rhetoric bullshit. As if scientists are „Anti energy“.
Imagine blaming poorer nations for carbon emissions.
Exactly. We used up the world's carbon allowance. We should be paying for renewable energy etc across the globe. Halt defence spending.
And think, when shit gets really bad were gonna jack their water and most likely win. Selfish I know but living in a superpower nation we'll at least have drinking water
Correct, it is the poorer nations that is causing global warming.
The deserts are increasing in these poorer nations because of incorrect cattle grazing. They are destroying their lands, they don't realise they are doing it.
People blame global warming because of carbon increase, its not correct. Carbon increase is because trees and plants are being destroyed in the poor nations.
Anything the BBC reports, you learn its all lies.
They all burn wood...charcoal and dung.....which pollutes
The air.....you fucking
Tard.
Yes they definitely do look up the statics and the facts
"We need to convince the leaders of India and Africa to stop using coal." India accounts for 8% of the world's carbon emissions, Africa accounts for less than 3%. The US on the other hand is responsible for 15% of carbon emissions worldwide, second only to China at 28%
Just wait till those places get a taste for air conditioning. US is tapped out on first time new AC Units sold. China is just entering the market with 1.5 Billion billion and India with 1 billion people. The US is currently leading the world in carbon reductions while China is the world leader in AC units sold even though AC is considered rare in China. So if you look at the trends US is leading the pack in reduction while the largest population countries are the new untapped market for AC. Those countries want to be 1st world nations with their own consumer base just as the US was in the 50s and 60s. Africa is a continent. 80% of the population does not have electricity while they are one of the top 5 coal global exporters. Africa is poor. They need to export it just to survive. Africa is becoming the next China for China and the world as the new production hub for cheap goods. As Africa becomes a continent of greater wage earners they will become a consumer of the cheap available coal. Three hundred million people in the US have AC. 3 Billion people want it. So if the US stopped all CO2 emissions, there is still no stopping it.
@@Paul-ou1rx…… you will find more electric vehicles in China than America. You cannot see it yet but you are sliding further behind.
proqsy co2 is not a driver of wsrming mr parrot. see greenpeace co founder on this.
@@MrAussieJules it wasn't a main driver before, but then again, there were no humans around then either..
It actually is the main driver in this scenario, because another warming effect to melt ice and release carbon is not needed when humans do it instead.
If you don't believe in global warming ask yourself this :
1. What is it that makes you believe what you believe.
2. What would it take to convince you otherwise?
3. If presented with the evidence you stated under 2,would you actually change your mind?
Remember, there is no such thing as an unfalsifiable claim 😉
Remember to adjust for the number of people living in China and the USA.
Otherwise you could argue that USA only emits 15% of greenhouse gasses, its the rest of the world that's to blame. 😉
You´re talking about the climate change issue, and you come up with Myron Ebell? Really?
Ok, I can see the temptation to go for the low hanging fruit. But, like Lawson, Myron Ebell is beyond ridiculous. There comes a point, Newsnight, where you stop inviting the Flat-Earthers to throw in their two bits. It´s a sphere, get over it, move on.
Agreed. As far as I'm concerned, impartiality and 'telling both sides' doesn't mean giving air time to liars as well as people who tell the truth.
There is no 'other side' when it comes to the issue of climate change. The academic consensus is that climate change is a very real problem. Those who argue otherwise are overwhelmingly crackpots who have no relevant expertise.
Captain Andy
Yep. You might as well invite on creationists or faith healers. Except science deniers on this topic are far far more toxic, irresponsible and dangerous.
+Michael RCH
Exactly.
I actually found his contribution both relevant and instructive because he's the closest thing they could get to the current US government's view on the issue.
My issue is that if the BBC are serious about covering climate change then they need to devote more than 15 mins to it!
Ebell's scientific views are irrelevant (and the interviewer was correct to interrupt his attempts to offer them). However, his opinion about the reaction of the Trump administration is relevant. However, I do think they should've led with a discussion about the report rather than him.
*Cleaner air is better* for all of us. We can agree on that.
@Donald McCarthy well the particles are goimg to fall eventually so it is and will be worse climate wise than now!
Can you turn off your computer then?
Carlos, CO2 is not a pollutant, ever hear of carbon based life forms? Every life form, plant and animal, on this planet is carbon based.
CO2 level has nothing to do with the quality of air.
epSos Premium
Yeah, CO2 is such a toxic gas.
Ask yourself a very simple comparison question.
What's more important....A human concept called "economics' ?
Or a system that gives life too life, called the ecosystem? Which is fact. CHOOSE!
I love the U.S., grew up there. But really, a lot of Americans are very selective of the science they follow.
Tell them that there's a new pill to enhance IQ, learn 20 languages, loose 20kg in weight in 5 hours #SCIENCEAPPROVED (even though there's just a small study by a team who's just getting started), and look at the aisles empty over night.
Tell them there's a general consensus on the science of climate change and its dangers, and see them suddenly become very skeptical and very "rigorous" and responsible about the things they listen to and follow.
The extreme double standards are simultaneously hilarious and depressing. Those people don't follow science, they follow a fetish.
Global warming is a good thing. The world's average temperature is a chilly 14 degrees
I understand your point and im not disagreeing with you but i think its important to realise science isn’t about how many people agree, its about proof. There was a census that the earth was flat at one point, and that was wrong. Census doesnt decide science. Just thought id point that out
Juno X I can tell you grew up in America. Your grammar is atrocious.
Yurigan Smith
Thanks for your contribution, while not disagreeing with your premise, its important to note that my initial point still stands, The Op’s logic is flawed in that he agrees to the notion of climate change on the basis of census and not un-refutable data. If he were to say “it is clear that the climate is changing, and scientific evidence points towards humans being a leading cause to its drastic increase” it would paint the same picture but in a more accurate representation :)
@@MCernoble we are talking about the world at large and how society is killing itself, yet all you care about is grammar.
The solution is up to each of us: Boycott fossil fuels.
How are you going to get to work?
Yes Kerry, that could be what it might take. But naturally, it would have to be an organized, global, attempt or it has little chances of working, and there needs to be a plan to keep people going on the alternatives while they are at it. It's terrifying but we are utterly, insanely, dependent on petroleum products, it's not just, the oil alone. That's the very sad thing about it.
My Best. Out.
@J H : But people like him/me are not in the wrong, though. This only, emphasizes the insane, over dependence we all, have toward this product. To the point I'm not sure anyone is trying hard enough, to find ways to help us get off of it completely.
I find myself in a similar position when it comes to animal cruelty, and people trying to get away from consuming animals as a food stuff. Even if, I succeed in not eating meat at all, for extended periods of time, which I have, I'm still, faced with the dilemma that I wear shoes that are made of animal by-products. I have a cat, and I'm forced to feed her meat, even if, I've stopped eating it myself.
You start off with the best of intentions then begin to realize HOW MUCH, these things are woven into every, single, little and minute aspect of our lives. Still, that should not stop us from trying though.
My Best. Out.
Yes. We've seen that. They call it "Naked and Afraid". I won't be doing that to combat pixie dust. Thanks for playing.
You should start right now no more power for you considering most Power is made by a fossil fuel. Thank God you thought this through.
We haven’t seen half of it yet, the next 10 years will be revealing.
No, it won't.
@@mister2628 shut you mouth science denier
lmao! I love this guy 5:57 "I don't want to hear your argument that the science is wrong cause you don't know anything about it!"
There is no one there to represent the other side of the argument.
Really? So how many sides are there?
@kingpest13 heroin addiction is really good for some people lol.
www.nytimes.com/2016/06/05/opinion/sunday/are-opioids-the-next-antidepressant.html
There isn’t another side to the threat that is likely to wipe out life on our world.
As a Floridian and a Political Science graduate.. I can only say that yes climate change is certainly occurring and affecting us here and that politics have poisoned and bifurcated the country of the United States.
Almost all of Florida is at sea level, it will be gone before 2050 with rising sea levels. Rising humidity levels will also make the southern US unfit for human life, even a perfectly healthy human body starts to shut down in a 100% humidity environment at 35+°C.
@@whatever9448 ahahaha holy shit, stop watching SciFi.
@@mister2628 a wild climate change denier appears. Climate change denier uses shaming, it's not very effective.
He seems to think he speaks for all Americans. He doesn’t. Time to stop supporting oil companies.
If we didn't have capitalism screwing everything up! Cost shouldn't even be a considering factor when addressing the future and wellness of our survival.
True capitalism would be solving the problem. US Capitalism is now constrained by oligarchy. The same is true of most of our world. Our grandchildren will despise our existence!
@@MrDouglasSawyer I actually completely agree with you that capitalism (there is no such thing as US capitalism btw) is getting screwed over by the oligarchy Douglas. Problem is we have gone through regulating and deregulating MANY times. No need to repeat history again, thanks. We have known these problems existed within capitalism for a very long time since the days of Marx.
My question to you is, if you want to stick with this horrible economic system, what would YOU do to bring about fairness and equality in capitalism so that we no longer have to see another oligarch in the future? My argument is that there is no such thing as true capitalism either, because it always ends in monopolies (and oligarchs).
@Aussie T-Sweet Im brainwashed?? WTF? I dont give a rats ass about your argument from authority! I have 2 comments for you ...
1) Who TF cares if Anthropogenic Global Warming is true or not, why would you not protect the Earth and our natural habitat, for the sake of protecting the Earth and our natural habitat?? Man-made or not, IS NOT THE ARGUMENT fool!
2) If you want to argue that fossil fuels do not impact the health and well being of humanity, I would have no problem with you wrapping your lips around my car tailpipe for a couple of minutes to prove my point!
Do you know how much pollution is acceptable? ZERO! So dont give me that conservatard BS, yours is clearly a shit-where-you-eat ideology! ... and you dont have any fkn problem with that at all!! ... and you think you are educated? Dumbass.
If we did not have capitalism you would not have shared your criticism of it and you would not have watched this news story. There is a fair chance without capitalism, you, me and about 90% of humanity would not be alive today.
Capitalism, which is free markets, which is freedom, more effectively provides prosperity than any form of authoritarianism.
If you mean that because of capitalism people drive cars, eat meat and fly planes on vacations instead of starving in ragged clothes, then I agree.
This aged as well as expected. Welcome to 2021.
Why do our world leaders continue to ignore this?
My theory is that it's because or political systems are run by old people.
People who only have a couple of decades left to live, at best.
We need younger people in charge.
Todays profit is more important to them than the future survival
Can we please have more reports about this and about the wars, famine and global economic instability that will engulf us over the next century as a result of climate change please? We need more political will to solve this problem, and that needs more public awareness of how terrible everything is.
Climatologists have never taken into account that the greenhouse effect traps heat from all sources, natural industrial & domestic, not just solar. Hence the extinction of all mammalian life in less than 10 years
Mother Nature’s Wrath - End of Days?
Stuart Close: For those who believe no proof is necessary, for those who do not believe no proof is possible.
Author: The genius of stupidity is that the stupid are too stupid to realise, that they are too stupid to be the geniuses; they stupidly assume themselves to be.
The genius of intelligence is when the intelligent reach a point whereby they are so humbled in the face of the awe-inspiring intelligence and might of our Cosmic Mother Nature, as to realise...
That, there is no such thing as to any one of us being a genius, for a proclivity toward genius, lies-only within the realms of the Genius and the Might of our Cosmic Mother Nature.
Although Co2 and other GHG’s do form a greenhouse effect, this is an *effect* which is an *aggravating factor* it is not the source or the cause of global warming, which is *RETAINED: INDUSTRAL + COMMERCIAL + AGRICULTERAL + WILDFIRE + SOLAR HEAT*.
What is never mentioned, is that billions of tons of hydrocarbons (black heat absorbing and radiating particles) which have and continue to be released into the atmosphere, which is the major factor in producing the *industrialised greenhouse effect*.
And from a level of common sense, scientists should have realised, just as GHG prevent solar heat escaping into outer-space, they also prevent *heat from all sources* escaping into outer-space.
Therefore it follows that it is the combined heat from the sun and from burning of billions of tons of fossil fuels and Trillions of litres of oil over a mere four centuries, that is the cause and driving force of global warming.
Further Confirmation: Originally the Earth was a mass of molten rock lava which *despite being in the full glare sun for billions of years*, continued to cool down to a point, where an atmosphere and the oceans could form for life to evolve.
And over the Earth’s lifetime and despite intermittent periods of climate change, there has never been a period where the Sun heated the Earth to such a level whereby life on the planet was threatened by extinction as it is now.
Therefore, regardless of the lies and propaganda put around by the big Oil and Fossil Fuel Corporations, these factors determine beyond contention the greenhouse effect, and global warming are a man-made event.
Disingenuous Climate Change Predictions
From the mid late sixties when news of a possible greenhouse effect came to public attention, the scientific community (99.9% employed by corporations and governments) was outraged by the few among them, who had dared to publicly raise the issue.
What followed was a concerted attack on the credibility of the dissidents, with scorn heaped on them and anyone who supported them.
The controversy raged on over decades with the corporate owned media and government (s) gaining a greater say in the public arena. However, despite this, the evidence continued to mount accrue until the majority (97%) finally had to accept that they had been wrong.
More than three decades was wasted, which could have been used to develop natural and renewable energy sources, instead of generations of climate change sceptics, and the increasing number of severe weather based tragedies we see occurring around the world now.
And all of the wasted decades and years since then; spent making over-optimistic climate change predictions, because they still have not observed as any gardener tell them, that all heat (natural & manmade) produced in a greenhouse is subject to the greenhouses heat reflecting and retaining effect.
Which means they are still operating under the delusion, that it is only solar heat that is being retained by the greenhouse effect, rather than in reality both solar and all manmade sources of heat.
And it is why all of their predictions have been wrong, and their time-lines continue to get shorter and shorter.
The only certain prediction that can be made is that global warming will continue to accelerate according to the increasing quantities of fossil fuels and oil that are being burned every day of the year.
Which means; that humankind will continue to accelerate towards its extinction, according to the increasing quantities of fossil fuels and oil that are being burned every day of the year. And other heat sources e.g. Forest and Bush fires, thawing of permafrost’s, munitions of war, the rot and decomposition of biological matter etc.
Useless International GHG Reduction Targets
Given that the international monetary and share marketing system is based upon the value of the American petrodollar, which varies according to the price that OPEC and the American and British Oil Corporations charge the rest of the world for oil.
Sidebar: The oil that OPEC and the American and British Oil Corporations obtain and sell they get for virtually nothing, as the overall costs of petroleum production are minuscule compared to the enormous profits they make, from selling oil to the rest of the world.
Which why, America Saudi Arabia and Israel are using every militaristic and politically Machiavellian means, to stir up trouble in and between other oil producing nations.
To prevent them from competing in the world oil market, as this would undermine the dominance of the American Black Gold Dollar.
And that China India and developing nations have to use ever increasing quantities of oil to meet their energy requirements, there is no way that heat production and GHG emissions are going to diminish rather than increase at any time in the near future.
The only means (and time is rapidly, or possibly has already run out?) by which life on Earth has any hope of survival, is for the whole of humanity to be faced with the truth.
That if they do not cease their warring’s over oil and territories, and come together to cooperate and work together as one species, for the survival of all.
What the Media Won't Tell You About the USA | reallygraceful - RUclips
ruclips.net/video/1bNaupemo1g/видео.html
What We Weren't Taught About Washington, D.C. | reallygraceful ...
ruclips.net/video/cOLKoxTStwM/видео.html
Zionism: Unmasked in 10 minutes | reallygraceful - RUclips
ruclips.net/video/3WhyLjMKWsw/видео.html&vl=en
What the Media Won't Tell You About Israel | reallygraceful - RUclips
ruclips.net/video/KDRuOhLLta0/видео.html
What the Media Won't Tell You About Saudi Arabia | reallygraceful ...
ruclips.net/video/9m8FW9s8Jsg/видео.html
Climate change is already irreversible - RUclips
ruclips.net/video/dC7A9FHLreI/видео.html
ADDITIONAL GLOBAL OVERHEATING FACTORS
The Earth’s radius is approximately 6,371 km and its surface area is approximately 510 million square kilometres (196,900,000 square miles) with an average of 1,000 watts of solar energy per square metre.
+
Trillions of kilowatts of heat released into rivers and oceans from the motors, and the heated toxic effluents from hundreds of millions of washing machines, dishwashers, showers, baths, and sewage from toilets, every year.
+
Billions of kilowatts of heat released from hundreds of millions of tons of curing construction concrete, and brick and ceramic kilns every year.
+
Billions of megawatts of heat released from the exhaust gases of billions of vehicles, trains, shipping, aircraft, NASA rockets, and the munitions of war every year.
+
Billions of kilowatts of wasted heat released into rivers oceans and atmosphere from Nuclear power stations every year.
+
Trillions of kilowatts of wasted heat released from burning billions of tons of coal to convert oil and bitumen into industrial and domestic oils, diesel kerosene, petroleum, petrochemicals, pesticides, herbicides etc.
+
Trillions more kilowatts of wasted heat used to convert oil into plastic and mould it into billions of tons of plastic trash, that is choking and poisoning the life out of tens of billions of marine land and birdlife every year.
+
Trillions of megawatts of heat released from mining, and smelting billions of tons of iron and steel, to make trillions of tin cans, vehicles, trains, ships aircraft, industrial and domestic machinery etc. etc. etc.
+
Billions of kilowatts of heat released from oceanic acidification, and chemically reactive domestic and industrial effluents every year.
+
Billions of megawatts of heat released from fires used for land clearance, every year.
+
Billions of kilowatts of heat released from billions of decomposing trees and vegetation due to land clearance, every year (3.6 Billion trees that were felled in 2012 alone, an area the size of Germany).
+
Billions of megawatts of heat increase, due to the loss of shade and the cooling transpiration of billions of trees, due to land clearance.
+
The sum of the extra heat retained by the Greenhouse Effect; due to the release of the 50+% of water content from, e.g. the 3.6 Billion trees that were felled in 2012 alone
+
Billions of megawatts of solar and motor vehicle heat being absorbed by billions of acres of black asphalt roads, and concrete cities, and released by runoff rain into sewers, rivers, and oceans.
+
The sum of extra heat retained by the Greenhouse effect; due to billions of cubic metres of heat-absorbing and radiating hydrocarbons being released into the atmosphere every year.
www.fromthecircletothesphere.net
rangus
By the next century, technology will probably make climate change a non-issue. I agree that more should be done meanwhile.
@@carldalton9331 I'm not willing to read all that, except the first couple of sentences, as I don't have the time or inclination for large texts like that right now. If you believe that you know more about climate science than the climatologists, then I am almost certain that you are wrong. It is all very worrying though.
@rungus24, did you know that we currently live in an Ice Age? Have you ever studied history? Throughout human history cooling has led to difficulties, famines and societal collapses; while warming has led to prosperity. Climate has always changed and the "climate change" scam is upside-down, backwards and inside-out. Study the science and understand it, otherwise the politicians will rot your brain with their paid scientific "consensus."
@@RodMartinJr Have you studied the science? The actual scientists say something very different from what you're saying, so I'm sceptical about your views.
In 1982 the nephew of Sir Harry Pilkington of the glass fame had lunch
with the owner of Fiat, Emilio Aurellio. Emilio offered the nephew a
job and said "We are creating a huge global environmental problem that
will frighten people into wanting a world government run by us". The
nephew did not accept the job. Emilio was the president of the Club of
Rome.
the youth inherit the earth, Maybe we should get it now and save it's life.
Destroy all the bitch conservatives and maybe you'll have a chance.
@@ivanj.conway9919 Please... try.
USA here. We totally believe in climate change, don't let our politicians speak for the rest of us!!!
US here, I don't call any politician "our or my" I don't vote for the corrupted lot who work for the crown, and you don't speak for me. Unlike you I know the weather and climate is controlled and modified.
USA here, we do not believe in climate change and refuse to waste trillions on the scam and give up freedoms to the globalists.
U.K. still say India needs to focus ! China contributes 30%, USA 30%...
Indians population to the UK, who's the real minority?
Most parts of the world see the sense in getting cleaner air and water. China, India and many other countries are making the USA and Australia look very slow indeed.
What is so special about us humans that we should not go extinct? maybe if we do go extinct then animals at least will finally live in peace.
Screw all the army budget globally and redistribute funds to what matters. Wouldn't that be nice...
Let's take this to its logical conclusion. What's to stop the thugs from simply taking the newly redistributed funds for themselves? So not only did the people you wanted to help financially not get to keep their un earned wealth they also get to know the joys of ass rape and slavery....yay nope you talked me into it give me a FUCKING PEN where do I sign?
do you lock your doors and windows?
And they pollute more than any one person, the other nice thing is they control our weather and climate, but sshhh it's a big secret.
Oompa Loompa thinks Isis is another organic little group like Extinction Rebelloons and Greta Th.U.N.berg eh and our weather and climate isn't modified the white lines in the skies are accidental global dimming or we can just call them fairy trails. Yes suit you? I hope so.
Mark Bot not only marauders, but marauders who are led by a couple of people who are paid by big bankers & their big oil buddies at that, but wait it's better than that all whilst our weather and climate is modified and has been for decades. Doesn't even dawn on them that real grass root organization would NEVER get the main stream coverage these people get, hmm could it be an agenda?
Grown up adults dressing like Bees and laying on the ground playing bloody dead as our Bees are being killed by Aluminum nano particles. Bees have no protection to acidified aluminum and develop Alzheimer’s like effects. They lose their ability to navigate, so we have bee colony collapse.
Reduce your meat and dairy intake, this will reduce your carbon footprint
carbon dioxide is good for the planet. We are at the low end for optimum plant growth.
we are procrastinating ourselves into a natural disaster that will soon be irreversible
I hope we can do what I do when I procrastinate and that is doing all of the work sufficiently before the deadline
Seeing that we could use carbon capture technology, it is not irreversible. Seeing that the world had CO2 levels 10x higher in the past without runaway temperatures or disaster we don't even need to cut CO2. In fact, more CO2 is better for plants and food production, and more heat is better for cold areas and growing seasons.
@@zUJ7EjVD 1. The sun was not that much dimmer. Either way, your theory is more CO2, more heat, that would cause more CO2 out of the ocean which would cause more heat and so on until apocalypse. But that didn't happen in the past proving CO2 does not have much effect.
2. We don't need carbon capture, CO2 is not dangerous, but if it was carbon capture is an option scalable over decades. There is the trillion planting project going on right now which is basically carbon capture.
3. CO2 is carbon and oxygen so not sure what your point is there. Higher CO2 level makes plants need less water due to less evaporation of interior moisture of the plants.
4. More heat "may" reduce the utility of some land but will also increase the utility of some land. Worst case the ocean rises 2-3 feet by 2100. This is not a big problem for us highly adaptive humans. It will not flood enough land area to make a difference.
There is advantages to more CO2 but likely disadvantages too. The question is what is the net effect and how much will it cost to do something about it? My advice is to study it and invest in better energy sources like nuclear fission and nuclear fusion.
@@zUJ7EjVD 1. The sun was dimmer and more CO2 may have helped trap more heat but that doesn't mean more CO2 now will translate into much more heat since there is a saturation effect.
3. Prove evidence plants are starving for water due to higher CO2. They are not. In fact, the planet is 15% greener today due to more CO2 proving most are getting enough water.
4. I heard that by 2100 climate change will cost about 4% of GDP but that is nothing since GDP is supposed to rise 400% by then so we will be much, much richer and it won't matter. The question is should we spend more than $100 trillion dollars over the next 80 years to have almost no effect on climate change (per the IPCC) to save a small portion of that 4% we didn't need anyway?
Let me ask you this about who are the conspirators. Which is worse crying wolf when there is no wolf (what I believe the climate alarmist are doing) or crying no wolf when there is a wolf? Clearly, the worse is crying no wolf as people are being eaten by the wolf. Think about it. This is why climate alarmists don't mind scamming us (the harm only comes out of our wallet) but it would be inconceivable for climate scientists (and people like me) that say this is not a huge issue knowing that it is. If I believed CO2 was a real danger I would say so and I have researched the issue for many years. The best advice is to let technology deal with it over the decades to come. The answers are out there in the future but we don't have them now.
@@zUJ7EjVD Oh my. I was just going to compliment you on an interesting discussion and then you had to insult me just because you don't agree with me, sad.
Make an argument next time to prove I am the ignorant one.
Imagine burning, abusing and destroying the only planet that can support life that we know of.
There is no place for ecology and sustainability under capitalism. Period. .Any kind of change without establishing this simple fact will be a facade...
*facade
David Meehan thanks I changed that;)
🙏
Fuck capitalism
Your wrong. The capitalist country's are leading the way at being good eco stewards.
"can you think of anything that the scientists can say that would persuade the administration to take this more seriously?"
"No."
Rip.
Josh Smith That is the only thing we needed to hear him say. Shameless.
"the scientists" you speak of are after money
they lie to protect future funding for man made climate claims and predictions that keeps their bank accounts full
Not all of us Americans are deniers most certainly :) Your guest politician needs to speak for himself (and the administration it seems). (BTW....love how you dealt with him :) Keep asking the questions we need answers to and make them answer indeed! We are all in this together in my humble opinion and we need to all come together.
The problem is;
We depend on the fiction of government being better than no government, actually working,
with voting as a quality-control.
Christians boast having no quality-control.
The same god we know for a perfect record of doing nothing,
is their servant for an unmeasurable number of prayers.
The only difference between a Republican & Democrat
is how fast the knee hits the floor when a donor walks in the room.
There is no plan, not for greenhouse gases, as long as energy is needed to keep the show on the road.
the real expense is not shifting away from fossil fuels
B.S. period
Great work by the host in challenging the US guest's ignorance
Qualified scientists > Random polician
Ironically, your choice of scientists makes your intelligence questionable. We live in an Ice Age and your side is pushing to cool the planet. Doh!
@@RodMartinJr There are no sides in this because it is a global phenomenon, and all human lives currently depend on the stability of the global ecosystem. We are all in this together, or at least our descendents are.
No one is advocating for cooling the planet. Some of us are advocating for slowing the rate of temperature increase to allow ecosystems time to adapt, so that we do not undermine the processes currently necessary for human survival.
deee, did you know that we live in an Ice Age? If the Holocene ends and those 2 "little" white things at the poles persist, we'll be in deep doodoo. Stability is increased by global warming!!! Study some climate science. Wind comes from temperature differences, and if the poles are nearly as warm as the tropics, then you'll have very mild winds.
Your ignorance is huge! Look up former CIA Director John Brennan speaking at the Council on Foreign Relations, June 2016. There he talks about cooling the planet using S.A.I. Just because YOU don't know about it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Study your history. Look up the Greek Dark Ages (cooling period), post-Roman Medievial Dark Ages (cooling period) and the Little Ice Age (cooling period), where famines and societal collapses were far more common. And then look up their opposites: Minoan Warm Period, Roman Warm Period, Medieval Warm Period and the Modern Warm Period -- all periods of booming economies, large building projects, lots of food.
Sides? There are facts and good interpretation on one side, and lies, half-truths and wrong interpretation on the other. I used to be on the wrong side for several years.
@deee fqdd At this rate of warming a tortoise could migrate north to a cooler climate in 3 months and then rest for 99 years.
@@kerryrus Yeah, that's what I said.
Nothing new here. They were saying the same in the 1930's
Humanity won't ever do anything about this until coastal cities start going underwater and by then it will be too late. We are hardwired only to respond to immediate threats.
Brandon S yea keep on being a good little parrot. or maybe google failed green predictions , there are many , many. co2 has nothing to do with climate change and would be better of higher or plant growth, see patric moore, greenpeace co founder.
@@MrAussieJules I find starting a debate with climate change deniers very taxing. Most of you are just a tick away from being as ignorant as flat earthers, so I send everyone to this video first: ruclips.net/video/OWXoRSIxyIU/видео.html
It's only 7 minutes long yet refutes most of the typical climate change misconceptions you guys like to keep spewing out. If you can address what's brought up in that video with even a hint of non-elementary stupidity I'll reply to you, but you aren't off to a very good start.
Btw I have a masters in chemistry and have been studying this topic for years so don't try to wow me with your piecemeal understanding of science.
@@brandons4240 and everybody clapped
Man I love that interviewer. He wouldn't take the bullshit for a second.
Do you know what a script and acting is? Apparently not.
You’re both morons....the world is twice as populated and significantly better air quality than in the 70’s ......that is. A fact
@@stephenmaniloff8493 If you take that as your argument, then you are the moron.
Meanwhile the U.S. Navy is taking this very seriously. And M. Ebell, this is not about being pro or anti-energy. It's about the sources of energy and switching to renewables and sustainables.
Claude LeBel, why haven't all the countries gone for green energy if it's our salvation?
"Renewables" are neither renewable or sustainable, their tied to OIL & they will die when oil dies. "Renewables" are just another way to PROFIT from the BURNING OF OIL!
You cannot replace RESOURCES with TECHNOLOGY & "renewables" produce NONE of the ESSENTIAL RAW MATERIALS WE NEED!
For example what technology can replace food & water? The answer is NONE!
All technology is useless without RESOURCES!
@Richard Cowley Rubbish. By now it is cheaper than coal :D
@Richard Cowley Hahahahahha .....you are falling for the propaganda of the big energy companies. Think about it this way: What is simpler: Blades, Gearbox Generator, converter, a tower. Wind generator, thats all it really includes. Now look at a coal plant. Fuel handling, boiler, flue gas treatment, a high tower aswell, three stage turbine, generator, condenser, cooling pumps, cooling towers. Having to hire people, wind turbines don't need as many people. And having to buy fuel..........coal may still be cheaper if you have the plant right next to the mine, but if you ship it like in many places...nope. Wind is already cheaper, after only a few decades of development against a century old technology. Batteries are still too expensive, but ultra large scale battery storage is a field that has seen very little work so far.....not surprising at all ! Will happen within a decade or two. And none of this figures in the cost of pollution. If every power plant had to pay some money for every drought and hurricane that happens beyond the statistical average i suspect clean power would completely smash conventional.....
@Richard Cowley Really ? You do realize that Aluminum, Steel and Silicon can and two of the three even MUST be made using electricity, right ?
Yet the total CO2 output of the USA keeps shrinking..... While the total CO2 output of the EU countries, China & India all keep RISING, despite all the blowhard "green" talk.
Lucky the American guy took off his tinfoil hat before the camera started rolling.
It is amazing, the wealthiest country in the world does not want to do anything, but they will take the advantage of the efforts of others.
Just the opposite. And since you don't know USA is bankrupt from policing the world for the slacker countries.
@@joemonroe9456…. The USA is not bankrupt, the money is there, its just in the Bank accounts of the corporations.
You are not being asked to take control, just to do your bit to reduce CO2.
co2 doesn't cause global warming. It such a small percentage that it has almost no effect on the atmosphere. That's why all of the predictions have failed. Watch some dissenting views.
ruclips.net/video/8RwjYkYCXnU/видео.html@@Eric-ye5yz
@@joemonroe9456 LOL you and the guy on your vid dont know jack shit about physics or CO2.
1. CO2 is vital to life on Earth. Without it the average temperature would be around 0F (-18C)
2. Preindustrial average temperature was 57F (14C) at 280 ppm CO2.
Lets do some math shall we? 14-(-18)=32C temp change so 32C/280 ppm CO2 = .1C/1 ppm CO2.
Now lets see where we are going. Current concentration of CO2= 411 ppm.
411-280=131 ppm CO2 rise over preindustrial levels
131ppm*(.1C/1ppm)=13.1 C rise in temperature.
now this approach doesnt take in some mitigating factors (actual temperature at this concentration would be about 4.5 warmer) but it is a good first order approximation of just how fucked we really are.
The most recent thing was based on over 6000 studies. We will reach 2C in 12 years if we don't change. This is real.
ADerpyRealty, try reading this report, the climate models are wrong!
science.house.gov/sites/republicans.science.house.gov/files/documents/HHRG-115-SY-WState-JChristy-20170329.pdf
Want to bet on this?
We have already reached 2 degrees in the tropics in Australia, I'm scared for my life, let alone every other living organism on this planet.
his is not REAL. WATTA FAKE SCIETIFIC PROOF THAT EVER EMERGED IN THE WORLD AS CLIMATE CHANGE. CLIMATE CHANGE IS A LIE, MANIPULATIVE, DECEITFUL and TWISTED NONSENSE. ALL THE DATA THT WERE PORTRAYED and DISPLAYED ARE FAKE and NOT SCIENTIFIC. IT'S ALL FAKE THE SAME AS GAY MOVEMENT. TO SAY NO COAL NO OIL STOP THAT CRAB. ALL THE SCIENCTISTS BEHIND THIS IDEA ARE NOT A SCIENTIST. ITS ALL FAKE and CRAB.. THEN WHAT ABORTION! OT CUT DOWN NUMBER OF MEN AND WOMEN BECAUSE OF CLIMATE CHANGE, TO DECREASE THE AMOUNT OF CARBON IN THE ATMOSPHERE!, AND THEN TO LEGALISE THE NONSENSE OF GAY MOVEMENT. DON'T YOU SEE THE LINK OF SUCH FAKE IDEOLOGIES and BELIEFS. FAKE SCHOOLS, FAKE TEACHERS, FAKE STUDENTS. FEEL SORRY FOR THE KIDS I MEAN IT THEY DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON.
Curse Capitalism
Wow, an interviewer/host who calls out bs... how refreshing.
Bbc, I’m very very disappointed with you platforming that denier. Did our dear Tory overlords make you do this? What’s the reason for it?
Ya better not let the public hear apposing views or they might decide for themselves, Oh the Horror!
The BBC is already a lefty propaganda outlet.
I don't think the problem is believing it or not. It's what should we do about it? Rationalize or push for innovation? It's not that simple.
I just had to be born in a time where economic, social and planetary disasters are coming to a head. Thanks life.
and I am glad that I turned sixty this yearm so my time is running out, slowly. I just feel sorry for the younger generations, their lives will be tougher than mine. The only bright side I see is, hard times tend to produce better people. 'cause my generation is worthless. We screwed not just the biosphere but everything that comes after. We're going extinct but nobody seems to care
@@geronimo19611 Oh they care alright -- they want us to suffer while they party party party ... ruclips.net/video/WtBT3M-RIZ0/видео.html
Extinction is winning the battle vs life. I knew we would lose that battle...but not this quickly.
Wow you people have to be paid to say this insane crap that or your so very so ignorant to the fact this video showed you weaponized weather Modified controlled weather and you think it's nature otherwise all they did was attempt to make the American look like an ass, I know who the asses are.
These BBC clowns proved nothing.
Stop it.
U must be a blast at dinner parties
I swear he called him 'Mr. evil' hahahaa
We can't wait for our leaders anymore. We all have to do this, now.
@Time Code The only thing that has brought rapid societal change to the world (e.g. civil rights, suffrage, etc,) that of which is required for the climate crisis which we've put off for 30 years, is mass civil disobedience. Otherwise known as protest. We need the largest protest of all time simultaneously, all over the world.
This old man does not care about the problem because he would not be alive to face the crisis.
This young man didn't want to wait to find out ... ruclips.net/video/EsePPZW4wuY/видео.html
@@climatecraze I'm very puzzled about how my comment from a few days ago has somehow become yours from a year ago. I don't know if I have you or RUclips to blame for this. I suppose you might want to claim it as the linked video is about someone who - arguably - took his concern for the fate of the planet (because of man-made global warming) too far. For the record, I (unlike you) accept the science that shows that the current warming _is_ due to human greenhouse gas emissions, and that it _will_ cause more and greater problems for humans and many other forms of life in the years to come.
@@ilikethisnamebetter How much did "man-made" CO2 warm the earth last year?
@@climatecraze 0.04 degrees centigrade. The global average temperature for 2022 was 1.16 °C above the pre-industrial baseline; 0.04 °C warmer than the value for 2021.
@@ilikethisnamebetter That's about the total thermal increase. Earth has been thawing out from the Little Ice Age for about 300 years. What part of the 0.04 degree warming was due to the thawing warming?
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! Along with all those polar bears.
Please everyone reading this turn off all your plug sockets, eat healthier, walk don’t drive, enjoy our planet and care for it 😭😭😭😭 before it’s gone....
Every time I hear a Republican talking about Climate Change one of my brain cells dies.
And two of theirs.
Pablo. Yes you can lose brain cells when you attempt to use them. Conservatives use theirs, apparently, you do not. CO2 based climate change is a scam.
We can tell from your moronic takes on the subject.
@@zUJ7EjVD "For C02 based climate change to be a scam would require a conspiracy of international scale." No. Conspiracies are not necessarily people getting together and making plans. The climate is changing, always, it is likely getting hotter due to coming out of an ice age and minimally due to higher CO2. The conspiracy is partly evil (sociopathic) people realizing there is money and power to be gained from the issue and their followers that are irrational, ignorant, or just want to be part of the movement.
Everyone makes something off of fossil fuels. Do you put gas in your car? Can you afford to buy a Tesla and a solar array instead? Nope? Trillions (of your tax dollars) are pegged to be spent on climate change along with growing governmental power (like the green new deal). Oil companies do spend money to support their businesses and fight off the lies being told but it is in the millions not trillions.
"The only scam here is you saying "conservatives use their brain cells"." ? Not an argument.
Pablo Quirós you don’t have many brain cells..
I like how they show smog and equate it to CO2, fires and equate it to CO2 and flooding and equate it to CO2. CO2 is not smog and is invisible. CO2 puts out fires. Flooding is due to water, H2O, not CO2.
It would be more appropriate to show lush forests and greenhouses and equate it to CO2, showing a fire extinguisher full of CO2, and showing people breathing out CO2 since 18.5% of us are carbon.
If carbon were a poison as some have said I would have 46 pounds of poison in my body. The next thing we will be told by our governments is that we need to die fat so they can bury the carbon and save the earth.
It is obvious the interviewer is biased and has bought into the tax grab. He is not really an interviewer but a propagandist.
This journalist is like a new Mehdi Hassan. Props to him 👍
Why did you give Ebbel a platform?
Staged much ?
To ridicule him. It's an appetizer. For a Yank like myself, it's cathartic.
Because he was honest enough to say no amount of evidence would change his mind.
Why do you have this person on the news? He’s just obstructing the change that we need to make.
Yea they need to stop fucking about now! and giving these people platforms as if they have valid things to say. We need to forget the deniers and work at the task at hand.
@Richard Cowley Im hurt dawg.
@Richard Cowley You are making me chuckle today so thank you.
@Richard Cowley Did you get confused about your commenting rants. I said nothing about any politics in my post.
@Richard Cowley Okay you have fun with that.
I really hate when politicians tell us what we think.
And that Brownie Baroness isn't a politician?
Worthington has been a Trustee at UNICEF since 2015 ,
UN_ICEF who has collected money since it's inception and has done little if anything for children? That woman doesn't know the weather and climate is engineered? Like hell she doesn't they all know, who doesn't know if the public.
The rate of warming according to Dr. Hansen and many climatologists is now very close to 0.2 C per decade. The IPCC is actually a very conservative body that doesn't make pronouncements without great analysis and introspection. If anything, the IPCC has consistently underestimated the rate of change as much of the data at the time of review is already several years old as the peer review process takes time. Also, the IPCC has consistently ignored the effects of methane (or at least underestimated emissions) as the data regarding the emission of methane from a variety of sources still is quite uncertain. Unquestionably, we are now in a state approaching many of tipping points that within this decade could very well propel the earth system into a more or less new state similar to that during the PETM.
He's quite right. Positive feedback forcings are very real, and most are ignored by the IPCC. The melting of arctic ice is the easiest and clearest to understand.
The more dark ocean replaces white, reflective ice, the more sunlight is absorbed as heat. Others include warmth reaching a point where permafrost melts and releases methane, further heating the atmosphere. Methane clathrates in the ocean, heat causing deforestation or desertification, etc.
There are many known, proven, factual positive feedbacks. There isn't a known tipping point, that's some godly level calculation to know what moment that would be, but there are known positive feedback effects.
It's, again, not rocket science.
@Richard Cowley Dude, you haven't disproven greenhouse gases or the greenhouse effect yet. You want to try working with science, instead of quoting parts per statistics?
There's a reason trace gases affect the atmosphere. The sun is the largest input, you're right. Greenhouse gases absorb radiant heat and reflect more back at the surface than the non-greenhouse variety. Do we agree on the basic physics? If we can agree on that I can help you learn why trace gases can raise the ambient temperature of Earth.
Water vapor, by the way, as Tyndall predicted, is far and away the strongest greenhouse gas in our atmosphere.
@Richard Cowley A simpler question for you is this: Why is Venus, and not Mercury, the hottest planet in our solar system?
Mercury is much closer to the sun, shouldn't it be much hotter than Venus?
@Richard Cowley
I'm not sure if you're aware of this, so I'm going to have to say it. The laws of physics on Earth and the laws of physics on Mercury and Venus are the same laws of physics. Can we agree on that? If we can't, I can't help you. No one can. Assuming you have a basic grasp of reality, we'll continue:
So your belief is that atmospheric pressure accounts for the temperature difference between Mercury and Venus? That's simply false. You're wrong, it hurts, but you're going to have to learn to live with it.
You realize people around the world, with an understanding of physics you lack, have calculated what Venus' temperature would be without GHG? Can you do that? Can you calculate how much hotter it would be at 2G's of pressure than at 1?
No, no you can't.
Is your contention that the entirety of atmospheric science and optics for the past two centuries is nothing but a conspiracy?
That's what you're contending.
You can wiggle and dance around it all you want, you're still ignoring the truth staring you in the face.
You prefer to believe disproven nonsense peddled by fossil fuel sponsored think tanks and general fundamentalist nut jobs.
Learn the science and disprove it or just ignore it. Being ignorant of the science and trying to disprove it is folly.
@Richard Cowley Ooo, the Cambrian epoch is a good point. It *was* much hotter during the Cambrian than it is today, at least as far as we know. Roughly 15C hotter on average during the peak of those CO2 emissions, which by the by, do not lag temperature by eight centuries, that's just patently false.
You would not want to live in a world resembling the Cambrian epoch.
that politician needs
to step out of his
Air conditioned D.C
office, and into the
boots of a Texas
construction worker
for the summer &
I BET HE WOULD CHANGE HIS VIEW!
And you need to step out of your UN IPCC brainwashing
Texas has been hot forever. What's your point?
@@Meekseek So youre saying climate change isnt real?
Another prediction. There have been so many failed predictions that I have lost count.
Unfortunately it looks like climate reality is developing even worse than the predictions, see for example the rate of ice loss in greenland and the antarctic.
After these two very hot and dry summers that killed off massive amounts of corn and forests in Europe I think one of the next catastrophic events will be massive flooding of a coastal Mega City. Sadly mankind needs these incidents to sense the danger it is running into.
@@achenarmyst2156 I think you missed the point of the OC. wade5941 is saying that this is bs because it's just another prediction of catastrophy that will also be wrong, just like every other failed prediction in the past. 100% of which have been wrong.
@@vatofat Actually you're wrong. Scientific predictions have nearly always been right.
Here's some education: ruclips.net/video/ugwqXKHLrGk/видео.html
This guy definitely thinks the earth is flat
Total twaddle. Get up to date information.
gasoline is money for the government, alternative energy is not 100 % money for the government
it's not just gasoline, theres : alcohol, tabbaco, entertainment, marijuana, medicine, and even the church payes the government
alternative energy is a threat to politicians life style ! !
.
pat fonta Politicians are only the paid out puppets. The faceless fossil fuel "supporters" are the real problem.
The male guest thats seated is wayyyy too confident in people. People are half asleep
No one whats to bite the bullet. What is stronger than the oil companies? Who can get elected without the support of the oil companies?
It is so unscientific to end discussions on a topic. Yet it is precisely what the IPCC is doing.
This denialist is complicit with the present crisis.
In fact people who have ignored real people telling you that weather and climate modification is real, are the complicit ones.
And what you watched here was a script and an act.
"even to what we eat" - one of the biggest causes of CC is still a foot note.
even environmentalist get uncomfortabe if you use the word 'vegan'.
@L. Johnson source?
@L. Johnson fair play. cooking method is significant too with carbon footprint.
asparagus for example has huge footplant as far as veggies go. did you se that as well?
suppose that you came across info that proved to you beyond doubt that animal agriculture was terrible for the planet, orders of magnitude worse than plants.
would you go plant based?
@L. Johnson are you in doubt that factory farming and industrial fishing is an environmental disaster?
@L. Johnson ok. to be honest, im not very interested in the ecology side of veganism. its too abstract and obscured -vested interests abound.
as for nutrition, i can recommend having a look at Dr. Greger's book How Not to Die.
id invite you to have a look at the documentaries Dominion (2018) and Earthlings if you havent already seen them.
The point of watching them is to see if the production of meat aligns with what your own moral beleifs about non human animals.
Oh dear, we are in such big trouble.
It's a worry when they think that 50 billion is too much when it's the same as we spend on defence. What the point in spending on defence when millions are going to be effected by climate change
provide untampered, empirical evidence for any of these man made climate alarm claims and predictions that have been proven ?
provide untampered, empirical evidence for money being taken as taxes, direct charges as having control over the climate ?
provide untampered, empirical evidence for any politician as having control over the climate through laws, regulations and instruction to the population ?
provide untampered, empirical evidence for mankind as having control over the climate and nature ?
if CO2 is the culprit ;-
What do you consider to be a safe level in ppm of CO2 for life on this planet ?
each question to be answered seperately
To tell you the truth, the older you get the less you take notice of this. They were saying similar in the 60's, 70's, in the 80's they were saying seas would rise so much that Peterborough would be by the sea in 2000. Ive been fishing on the same beach since the 70's and the tide always comes up to the same place. They keep going on about floods, storms, hurricanes like they are something new.
I think that their main concern is population growth, industrialisation and prosperity of the east, and that natural resources are not inexhaustible. We need to start weaning ourselves off of reliance on oil gradually and find alternatives, that's the truth of it.
Smoke And Fumes Committee has known it since 1946
you are right ..and never forget that there was a mile of ice over Peterborough 18,000 years ago . Vineyards in York, Thames freezing, Minoan warm period....Dont talk to me of 0.15 of a degree when no thermometers agreed to 2C more than 50 years ago..if they ever were used and covered the world with their daily readers.
Yep I have been around long enough too. We were carefree surfer kids in the eighties and were happy to know there would be more violent weather systems to make waves, which never happened. The opposite happened, decadal reduction in cyclones, and besides our sea level is just where it was then despite artist representations of how our town would be covered by sea water in 2001. But people don't realise how important the outcome of prediction is in science. They don't realise they are being led down a garden path by people who pay "scientists" to practice confirmation bias. Because when the facts dont fit a hypothesis they think the facts are wrong and try harder to look for reasons why they could be right. When predictions fail it directly condemns the fundamental explanation on which it rested. Its a classic scam driven by baseless fearmongering and argument from authority. Why? Not sure but I think it helps westerners to accept trade realities, that we can consume and produce in patterns that push wealth to the east. So the east modernises by making all the things we used to make. There is an obvious trade disparity there that is covered up by outsized deficit financing causing various asset bubbles in the west. I think the east will go through this same wind-down though at a future time. I think higher level international authorities have serious problems dealing with humanity and all its failings. I just wish we could start to tell the truth.
@jimmy goody Ther massive population increases sure make that reservoir lower... the Tigres and Euphrates ( et al) hardly get any water now..the Iranians and Turks snaffled it all over the border. As a result the Syrian and Iraqi kids have no jobs on the land and they cause trouble. Water is often the wider issue.
Essentially Jimmy, Iraq is a mixture of old tribalism ( fading now) Religious groups ( a few of them ) political parties ( plenty of them) and simply criminal gangs ( underestimated and masquerading as any of the other groups). The lack of water and the existence of 10 person familie....and a poor country to start with does not help at all.
Solving climate change will solve the economic inequality problem, and bring down healthcare costs. Damn, dat analysis.
That is too bad for us...
How about you get 99 climate scientists arguing for man made climate change and one clown not in climate science arguing against. That would be way more representative than what you are trying to do here....
DON'T THINK WE WILL BE HERE BY 2050 !! AND I BELIEVE THEY KNOW !
Lmfao make this guy interview all of these Trump people! That was great!!
The comment about India and China is a bit misleading. India has one of the best climate change performances. China is medium. Canada, Australia , Japan are way behind. USA is at the very bottom.
A rare and refreshing comment about climate change. Thanks. China actually knows and follows climate science ... ruclips.net/video/b1Iu9D5RhqQ/видео.html
hahahahahah American meeting an actual Journalist who just stops him when he tries to claim he knows more than the scientist.
There are plenty of scientists that can prove climate change from CO2 is not happening. Is the journalist a scientist? No so why listen to him?
Myron Ebil should not presume to speak for the american people
Yet he seems to speak for the White House. Go figure.
Yep with policians like this we’re doomed.
this report is junk , if you know of an extreme weather event that can be found to have been caused by human activity increasing co2 levels in the atmosphere then detail exactly how it occurred , and if you think these "scientists" are correct why has nobody created a mini climate in a lab ? if the models are all correct and the science is settled then it should be repeatable with matching results
climate scientists know fuck all about what drives the weather on this planet , and the BBC are churning out propaganda in the belief it will bring more funding
@@philiphall4805 do you seriously believe what you have written or are you just a troll. The report is correct and I suggest you research more for yourself the maths and science is all out there.
@@charlieford5523 yes i do believe what i have written , the report is garbage , as is the science behind climate change , the mechanism has not been explained , not even close , nobody knows how hurricanes are formed , the conditions leading up to a hurricane are known but not exactly why some form and most do not , they know very little
ask yourself this...........if given unlimited resources , could any of these climate scientists end a drought , or stop a flood ?
I think not
Andrew Foden Remember the climate does not know it’s forming a hurricane or that there is a drought so there has to be a mechanism , which is unknown
Check the IPCC website on how hurricanes are formed , the explanation is about 6 lines
When has the climate ever stayed the same?
Ben MacAdam This is human caused pollution/habitat destruction/overfishing and hastened climate change.
@@josephfigliuolo7286 Conflating climate change with pollution, the first isn't manmade the second certainly is.
With no ice more warming will occur even faster we are only a few years away.
Stopping burning coal would allow sulphate particles to drop out of the air and cause a lack of global dimming to fuel temp rises by a further 1/2 a degree.
200 species a day are currently going extinct, we are on the list.
Crops have failed in places already this year, how long before starvation of our hugely overshot population is normal.
Methane release in the Arctic will make human releases of greenhouse gases seem slight.
Nuclear power station take up to 60 years to decommission, we prob have about 10 left before our demise.
Iam afraid we already left it too late and a 4+++ C rise cannot be stopped.
The media and most scientists are still being conservative, just enjoy the time you have left.
"With no ice more warming will occur even faster"
Not only that. Temperatures are already dangerously close to a point where methane trapped in permafrost will be released into the atmosphere in growing amounts. Methane is a more potent greenhouse gas than CO2. This could start a very dangerous feedback loop.
EDIT: Ah frick, I should have clicked "Read more" before typing this comment.
Its not just about whats outside your window any given moment its big picture stuff and more extremes is part of it
Since the planet is cooling, I really wouldn't worry about it... We've been fed this bullshit for years and nothing has happened,no sea level rise, no ice melt.... Nothing g
Except a shit ton of ice has disappeared wonder why
My area of canada it's been snowing alot, cold wet fall. Like every other fall/October nothings changed here.
Obama buys $15,000,000. Beachfront home.
Not a single word of criticism.
You know damn well if Trump
Bought a $15,000,000 beachfront home
The media would melt down
I agree for sure, but that doesn't mean I support trump. The media has definitely been unfair to him, but I disagree with his pro energy stance.
It's terrible for the environment to continue like this
Sri Pranamya Budda I remember in 1972 in Los Angeles calif, the air was all YELLOW. Now the air is clean. It used to be way worse. The Indians in Los Angeles Calif back in 1500 before the white man arrived called Los Angeles, “the valley of the smoke.”
@@PInk77W1 Yes, we cleaned up air pollution in many cities, but we just exported it to other parts of the world. The air pollution in China and India is far worse than LA ever was--partly because we offshored our manufacturing there. Overall, we are rapidly driving the Earth towards ecosystem collapse.
Take care.
Karl Wheatley I’ve ridden my bicycle across India and China. Had zero problem. I saw a lot of litter on the ground, but the air didn’t bother me once. I know my story is just one person.
Says the people with 10 houses and private jets.
Con wanting to Tax you more to pay for the upkeep.
I'm pretty sure people who take climate change seriously also say that we need to radically alter the consumption habits of everyone on earth. If we want to take climate change seriously we can't maintain a class society where greed and exploitation is rewarded.
Do you know who started and runs the Carbon Disclosure Project in the UK? Investment bankers!
The host of this program needs to be hired immediately by one of OUR networks!
The wandering eye through me off for a second there. Nice guy though it seems.
Woah. Actual reporting! Thank you so much for holding his feet to the fire on this one. This was an excellent interview for sure!
Too many people.
And the too many people are certainly not White, White people make up only 7% of the world's population.
Edith Callaway I won't outright call you racist because people on the internet seem to be extremely sensitive about this nowadays, but let's say that if I interpret your comment right, it's hella racist. And your statistics are way off, since race isn't a scientific concept it is hard to measure, but most of what I found ranges from 18-30% which makes our race at the very least the third largest
Tobias Zauzig My comment had nothing to do with "race". The point I am making is that there are too many people on this planet and our consumption of the earths resources is at an unsustainable level. One of two things will happen ; either we take steps to reduce our population, or "Nature" will do it for us, with what I anticipate will involve unimaginable suffering and destruction. It's that simple.
Too many people eating animals. Supply and demand, people want meat, that means more land is cleared to grow food for the animals.
@@alanknight8439 why do you think I wrote that name at the beginning of my comment? My response was not directed at you, it was directed at Eddith Callaway.
When all the ice melts in Antarctica, the oceans will rise by about 400 feet. The calculation is easy to do: 1. The ice in Antarctica varies from 0.5 mile to 1.5 miles in depth (thickness). Assume a uniform thickness of one mile (5280 feet). Antarctica land mass covers 5% of the surface area of the Earth. The oceans cover about 66% of the surface area of the Earth. So: 5280 x .05 = "Y" x .66 Where "Y" is the sea level rise in feet "Y" = 400 feet.
Plant trees!!!!! They like CO2!
The amount of reforestation needed to effectively counter climate change is so massive that it would interfere with global capitalism. So there is no chance of following your advice if we don‘t reform our economic system.
Mike David great option mike I live in rural England and I have seen almost all the green belt lost to houses animal habitat gone my village is surrounded by cheap houses. We have raped this earth for decades reckon we deserve what’s coming.
I heard "Very good evening to you Mr Evil"
Reinvest all defense budgets to DEFEND from the end of human society!
YES JAMES! NOW YOU'RE TALKING!
This is the sickening thing about the U.S. for outsiders; all those trillions spent on defense could actually CREATE, WHOLE NEW, CLEAN ENERGY INDUSTRIES! You could both, go green and maintain a strong economy while you are at it.
WHAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH THESE BASTARDS ANYWAY??!!
My Best. Out.
I don't understand how a person can honestly and in good faith say that science is just wrong when they can't even read research.
Been selling this since 1971.
Goal post keeps moving.