The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

Pete wrote: ↑Sun Oct 30, 2022 6:46 am Interesting logic......how many people were around in 1850, compared to now? Surely you're not a climate change denier, Christel.
I skied around Europe back in the day, and it was clear to me that a change was taking place at an increasing rate.
Great years with plenty of snow when I started.....then the occasional poor year and the need to go higher, then a few years later, snow cannons started appearing.
The jury is out as to whether climate change is entirely down to the sheer weight of humans now ripping the guts out of the planet, but it can't be helping...

Pete

Can relate to the skiing issue from when I first started skiing in the late 80's.

Also, my first trip over to the west coast of the USA in the mid 80's and taking photo's flying over Greenland, and late summer, it was completely snow covered with glaciers, and ice bergs off the coast. Compare to 35 years later flying the same route at the same time of year, and well, it's almost all brown, not white, and very few bergs in the sea.

I don't think the jury can be out on the subject of sheer weight of humans being the cause. Its a hugely sobering fact to me, that it took all of human history up to 1960ish when I was born to get to 4 billion humans on the planet, and in just my lifetime, its now doubled to 8 billion.....and that sharp vertical rise on the population graph pretty much follows in the same time scale the global warming increasing change.
No politician dares to make mention of this though rather blinding obvious connection between the two.

Nature will find a way of culling that number significantly one day though, as it always does. Human's have been such a small speck on this planets existence timeline, and the planet will outlast human existence on it by an equally long period.

Interestingly the birth rate has been in decline since the late 1990s.

It is increased longevity that is driving the population boom not more babies.

Lets just make the number up:


https://www.gbnews.uk/opinion/a-green-a ... ver/404894
A report published by Lancet reminded the world that around five million people die every year on account of climate extremes.

Of those deaths, 4.5 million are caused by cold compared to five hundred thousand attributed to heat. In our time on this planet, an interglacial between ice ages, it is always the cold that is far more of a deadly threat to human life – ten or 20 times as deadly.

And yet still the priests of the new religion of climate fear preach that we must cool the world.

You’ve probably heard that 97 per cent of scientists are agreed that humans are the cause of climate change. It comes from research carried out in 2013.

Do you know how that team obtained that number?

They gathered nearly 12,000 scientific papers dealing with global climate change. They didn’t read the papers – heavens no, that would have been proper research – instead they looked at just the summary paragraphs on the front covers.

On that basis they grouped them into four piles. 3,896 papers agreed humans were to blame for climate change; 7,930 took no position either way; 78 rejected the idea of it being humanity’s fault and 40 were uncertain altogether.

That initial pass gave a figure of just 32 percent blaming humans for climate change. Obviously, that wasn’t nearly scary enough. So then came the gross and clumsy cheat: the 7,930 papers that took no position on whether humans are to blame were removed from the final analysis.

With them gone, the figure of 32 percent went up to 97 per cent. And the likes of Barack Obama and Al Gore have been quoting it ever since.

If my interpretation is correct, this is the kind of deliberate tampering with evidence that underpins the Net Zero madness that is being pursued by the zealots running our countries, or rather ruining our countries.

OR:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... -by-humans
The scientific consensus that humans are altering the climate has passed 99.9%, according to research that strengthens the case for global action at the Cop26 summit in Glasgow.

The degree of scientific certainty about the impact of greenhouse gases is now similar to the level of agreement on evolution and plate tectonics, the authors say, based on a survey of nearly 90,000 climate-related studies. This means there is practically no doubt among experts that burning fossil fuels, such as oil, gas, coal, peat and trees, is heating the planet and causing more extreme weather.

A previous survey in 2013 showed 97% of studies published between 1991 and 2012 supported the idea that human activities are altering Earth’s climate.

This has been updated and expanded by the study by Cornell University that shows the tiny minority of sceptical voices has diminished to almost nothing as evidence mounts of the link between fossil-fuel burning and climate disruption.

The latest survey of peer-reviewed literature published from 2012 to November 2020 was conducted in two stages. First, the researchers examined a random sample of 3,000 studies, in which they found only found four papers that were sceptical that the climate crisis was caused by humans. Second, they searched the full database of 88,125 studies for keywords linked to climate scepticism such as “natural cycles” and “cosmic rays”, which yielded 28 papers, all published in minor journals.

Why agonise about something that we can now do sod-all about ?
No one knows exactly what'll happen over the next 50 years, but it's looking increasingly likely that we're screwed, or rather the grandkids will be.

Pete

Pete,
I seriously doubt the human race will last 50 more years!

Dodgyrog, you're probably right...

Pete