Jump to content

Climate Change thread

Recommended Posts

57 minutes ago, Baron99 said:

Some posters have mentioned earlier about an apparent lack of balance on the reporting the environmental issues with no counter arguments being heard?

 

Interesting today, watching the BBC`s News Watch programme & they had one of the BBC News' environmental reporter stating that as a young reporter, whenever he presented a piece his old BBC editors / bosses would demand that both protagonists, for & against, were given the opportunity for comment.  Apparently now that is not the case.  These days you only report on the story in front of you.  So unless there is some kind of counter demonstration debunking the global warming threat, the other side of the argument won't be heard. 

 

If this is the BBC's reporting policy these days, not only is it bad for current environmental issues but also for other major issues of the day.  Basically it amounts to those who shout loudest will be heard & sod the little voice. 

Hmmm... :huh:


... well you certainly don't have to look too far to see examples of that! :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Baron99 said:

Some posters have mentioned earlier about an apparent lack of balance on the reporting the environmental issues with no counter arguments being heard?

 

 

Are we to hear from creationists every time anyone discusses evolution? Or from flat earthers during coverage of the round the world yacht race?

 

Sometimes the evidence is so overwhelming that it becomes accepted fact and doesn’t need the counter argument putting continually .  Climate change is one of those things now. There is huge scientific consensus that it is happening, that it is serious and that it requires drastic global action.

 

If the nay sayers want to gather and present evidence, that’s fine. They’ve been trying to do so for years, but really there isn’t s single credible scientific body that thinks that climate change  is anything but a global crisis. 

 

There is no requirement for the BBC to give equal airtime to cranks with poorly evidenced claims. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Pettytom said:

 

Sometimes the evidence is so overwhelming that it becomes accepted fact and doesn’t need the counter argument putting continually .  Climate change is one of those things now. 

 

No it isn't. Climate change existing is one thing, the degree to which anthropogenic climate change is affecting the overall climate by itself is another. As shown in the blog link posted by another user a few pages ago, it's far from being cut and dry, but the BBC is selective in how it presents the evidence so they can, effectively, brain wash the masses who cannot be bothered to think for themselves, and/or for those who only want to see the fashionable side of the argument to give themselves an identity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That blog that's full of lies and cherry picking? That blog?

 

Right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Halibut said:

Yes it is.

What is? Evidence of climate change, or evidence of the proportion of the climate change with anthropogenic origins?

Just now, ads36 said:

That blog that's full of lies and cherry picking? That blog?

 

Right.

The BBC is guilty of cherry picking, e.g. selective use of time periods on graphs to restrict the context.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are simple things which everybody could do which would make a lot of difference. I recently read a magazine article which said that human urine is one of the best plant nutrients, so I now have a 1 litre glass jar in the bathroom which I pee into instead of wasting gallons of water flushing away a few millilitres of waste every day. When it's full, I pour the contents into a watering can and fill it with water to water the plants. It not only cuts the amount of water I'm taking from the reservoirs but will also cut my water bills. If everybody in the country did this, it would save huge amounts of water and postpone the day when our reservoirs finally run dry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, despritdan said:

There are simple things which everybody could do which would make a lot of difference. I recently read a magazine article which said that human urine is one of the best plant nutrients, so I now have a 1 litre glass jar in the bathroom which I pee into instead of wasting gallons of water flushing away a few millilitres of waste every day. When it's full, I pour the contents into a watering can and fill it with water to water the plants. It not only cuts the amount of water I'm taking from the reservoirs but will also cut my water bills. If everybody in the country did this, it would save huge amounts of water and postpone the day when our reservoirs finally run dry.

I'm sorry but I'm not going to be urinating into containers and using it for plant watering any time soon. We're a civilised society. Where do you think water goes when flushed down the toilet anyway? It doesn't magically disappear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, WiseOwl182 said:

 

No it isn't. Climate change existing is one thing, the degree to which anthropogenic climate change is affecting the overall climate by itself is another. As shown in the blog link posted by another user a few pages ago, it's far from being cut and dry, but the BBC is selective in how it presents the evidence so they can, effectively, brain wash the masses who cannot be bothered to think for themselves, and/or for those who only want to see the fashionable side of the argument to give themselves an identity.

There isn’t a credible scientific body that doesn’t accept the causes and potentially catastrophic effects of man made climate change. Instead of reading blog posts, spend a bit of time on the Royal Society website,  or on the Royal Society of Chemistry website.

 

Both have extensive areas that gather together masses  of research. It really doesn’t make for pretty reading.

 

The BBC are absolutely correct to ignore the fringe elements in this debate.  I know that it is trendy to ignore experts these days. This issue is far too serious to be a slave to fashion 

 

 

10 minutes ago, WiseOwl182 said:

I'm sorry but I'm not going to be urinating into containers and using it for plant watering any time soon. We're a civilised society. Where do you think water goes when flushed down the toilet anyway? It doesn't magically disappear.

I have a bucket on my allotment. When I’ve peed into it, I pour it onto my compost heap.  It is an age old trick.

 

I get lovely cabbages and it hasn’t affected my civility😀

Edited by Pettytom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was in a 2nd hand / antique / junk shop yesterday (bought an old "Lee's dairies" milk bottle).

 

There was a short queue of old ladies at the counter, they were talking about climate change (Time we did something, every little helps, etc.)

 

People are talking about change, it's a start! ...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, despritdan said:

There are simple things which everybody could do which would make a lot of difference. I recently read a magazine article which said that human urine is one of the best plant nutrients, so I now have a 1 litre glass jar in the bathroom which I pee into instead of wasting gallons of water flushing away a few millilitres of waste every day. When it's full, I pour the contents into a watering can and fill it with water to water the plants. It not only cuts the amount of water I'm taking from the reservoirs but will also cut my water bills. If everybody in the country did this, it would save huge amounts of water and postpone the day when our reservoirs finally run dry.

If you want to do that it's fine, but as WO said, flushing water away doesn't magically make it disappear.

We aren't going to run out of water in the UK, you might have noticed that it rains a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

In parts of Britain, we rely on extracting water from aquifers (about a quarter?), These resources are replenished slowly, and some of them are being used faster than is sustainable.

 

Every litre of water that comes out of our taps has to be processed, and pumped.

 

It's really quite an intensive substance, both from an energy and infrastructure perspective. Have you noticed how good we are at building infrastructure in this country? No, neither have I...

 

(We're not 'running out', but we're flirting heavily with our capacity to extract/process/pump the stuff)

 

 

 

Edited by ads36

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had to look this up and do a bit of reading, interesting subject

 

 

Quote

 

Climate change impact

Climate change impacts by 2040
Figure 2: climate change impacts by 2040.

As part of the water resources management planning process, water companies were also required to estimate the effect that climate change might have on the availability of water in their supply areas. These impacts are a combination of the predicted effect of climate change on groundwater levels, plus the resilience of the water supply system to climate change, such as borehole depths and pump intake depths.

Our plot of estimated climate change impacts on groundwater deployable output (DO) (Figure 2) suggests that the models used calculate that relatively small impacts (zero across more than half of England, and less than five per cent across the rest of England and Wales) are expected. Again, companies have had to consider supply or demand management options to ensure they can continue to meet demand given these likely future reductions in supply from existing sources.

 

 

 

Small levels of impact expected due to climate change.  Saving your pee appears to be entirely unnecessary given the picture painted here.

From https://www.bgs.ac.uk/research/groundwater/waterResources/GroundwaterInUK/2040.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.