April 23, 20197 yr 14 hours ago, kent_white said: We can. It's called Palaeoclimatology. It may be able to indicate proof of some cataclysmic weather event or other but there's no fucking way it has any relevance to annual weather patterns.
April 23, 20197 yr 5 hours ago, bolty58 said: It may be able to indicate proof of some cataclysmic weather event or other but there's no fucking way it has any relevance to annual weather patterns. Bolty doesn't understand it so it must be wrong.
April 23, 20197 yr 5 hours ago, bolty58 said: It may be able to indicate proof of some cataclysmic weather event or other but there's no fucking way it has any relevance to annual weather patterns. We can using techniques called temperature proxies - like dendrochronology or examining cylindrical samples of the ice core. We've got a record from Antarctica dating back just over half a million years using the latter. Those are two of the most well known ones - but there are quite a few others too if you look into it.
April 23, 20197 yr 1 hour ago, kent_white said: We can using techniques called temperature proxies - like dendrochronology or examining cylindrical samples of the ice core. We've got a record from Antarctica dating back just over half a million years using the latter. Those are two of the most well known ones - but there are quite a few others too if you look into it. You can fool some of the people some of the time. Impressed with the vocabulary though. Keep it up.
April 23, 20197 yr 2 hours ago, kent_white said: We can using techniques called temperature proxies - like dendrochronology or examining cylindrical samples of the ice core. We've got a record from Antarctica dating back just over half a million years using the latter. Those are two of the most well known ones - but there are quite a few others too if you look into it. Saw something on that, can even indicate what type of pollen was most prevalent in the air over periods, different pollens indicating grass lands or forests etc, what type of trees in the forest ,itself indicating the weather conditions that must have prevailed and whether it was a coastal area or well inland at the time. Was interesting but obviously it couldn’t tell me that it was raining on a Tuesday 10000 years ago so I’m not sure it’s any use or realiable really 😉
April 23, 20197 yr 2 hours ago, kent_white said: We can using techniques called temperature proxies - like dendrochronology or examining cylindrical samples of the ice core. We've got a record from Antarctica dating back just over half a million years using the latter. Those are two of the most well known ones - but there are quite a few others too if you look into it. 499,700 years BC - Snowed 499,699 years BC - Snowed 499,698 years BC - Snowed . . . 1 year BC - Snowed 1 AD - Snowed 2 AD - Snowed . . . 1999 AD - Snowed 2000 AD - Snowed 2001 AD - Snowed 2002 AD - Snowed 2003 AD - Snowed 2004 AD - Snowed 2005 AD - Snowed 2006 AD - Snowed 2007 AD - Snowed 2008 AD - Snowed 2009 AD - Snowed 2010 AD - Snowed 2011 AD - Snowed 2012 AD - Snowed 2013 AD - Snowed 2014 AD - Snowed 2015 AD - Snowed 2016 AD - Snowed
April 23, 20197 yr 5 hours ago, MickyD said: 499,700 years BC - Snowed ... 2016 AD - Snowed 2017 AD - Didn't snow - anything changed ?
April 23, 20197 yr 7 minutes ago, ZiggyStardust said: 2017 AD - Didn't snow - anything changed ? I'm sure it did in Antarctica but somehow I managed to push send before filling in 2017 and 2018.
April 23, 20197 yr Trouble is, if we wait around for absolute proof of things, then we risk not being able to prevent or stop an event. Keep looking at the science, but taking steps on the basis of what we are finding out now can't be a bad thing. Especially if it can be incorporated into the way we live and the economy too.
April 23, 20197 yr 29 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said: Trouble is, if we wait around for absolute proof of things, then we risk not being able to prevent or stop an event. Keep looking at the science, but taking steps on the basis of what we are finding out now can't be a bad thing. Especially if it can be incorporated into the way we live and the economy too. There's not really any such thing as an absolute certainty in science. That's why I trust it more than anything or anybody that claims to be absolutely certain about things. But you're dead right - the longer we piss about - the less likely we are to do anything about it.
April 23, 20197 yr 31 minutes ago, kent_white said: There's not really any such thing as an absolute certainty in science. That's why I trust it more than anything or anybody that claims to be absolutely certain about things. But you're dead right - the longer we piss about - the less likely we are to do anything about it. Fair point. Though I remember that group one metals in water video from school, and I reckon with absolute certainty, that if lob rubidium or caesium in a dish of the wet stuff, it goes bang 😀
April 23, 20197 yr 12 hours ago, bolty58 said: You can fool some of the people some of the time. Impressed with the vocabulary though. Keep it up. Here's an excerpt from BBC GCSE Bitesize revision to help explain things for you...... https://www.bbc.com/bitesize/guides/zx234j6/revision/1
April 24, 20197 yr 7 hours ago, kent_white said: There's not really any such thing as an absolute certainty in science. That's why I trust it more than anything or anybody that claims to be absolutely certain about things. But you're dead right - the longer we piss about - the less likely we are to do anything about it. ...and we ALL agree on this I believe.
April 24, 20197 yr 4 hours ago, kent_white said: Here's an excerpt from BBC GCSE Bitesize revision to help explain things for you...... https://www.bbc.com/bitesize/guides/zx234j6/revision/1 My brain hurts. Won't bother thanks so that worthless turd fromage face can like that. Like I have said all along, I am with you on many things in this push to clean up our planet. I just will not swallow everything and discount the possibility of cyclic events having had some effect on the current situation regarding temperatures. Plastic pollution is clear and evident. Fossil fuels will undoubtedly be phased out over the next few decades. I suspect that the vegan/vegetarian/meat is murder Nazis will eventually have an effect on the production of beef thereby reducing methane levels. If we could annihilate street blocking protesters as well then we'd really be on a roll.
April 24, 20197 yr 6 hours ago, bolty58 said: My brain hurts. Won't bother thanks so that worthless turd fromage face can like that. Like I have said all along, I am with you on many things in this push to clean up our planet. I just will not swallow everything and discount the possibility of cyclic events having had some effect on the current situation regarding temperatures. Plastic pollution is clear and evident. Fossil fuels will undoubtedly be phased out over the next few decades. I suspect that the vegan/vegetarian/meat is murder Nazis will eventually have an effect on the production of beef thereby reducing methane levels. If we could annihilate street blocking protesters as well then we'd really be on a roll. An interview with a former vegan/protestor type a few weeks back. He's had a complete change of heart, eats some meat now to help his health. Now getting plenty of flack from his former comrades. Quite interesting listening to the conversation. I do accept there is an issue with "methane", what is also not addressed is the environmentally poor method of producing fruit and vegetables. Everything needs to be looked at.
April 24, 20197 yr 4 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said: An interview with a former vegan/protestor type a few weeks back. He's had a complete change of heart, eats some meat now to help his health. Now getting plenty of flack from his former comrades. Quite interesting listening to the conversation. I do accept there is an issue with "methane", what is also not addressed is the environmentally poor method of producing fruit and vegetables. Everything needs to be looked at. The thing is its about volumes, quantities and where things are produced. Eating vegetarian or vegan might be better for the world - but if everyone did it there would be more transport required. The issue with meat is the whole cycle and then transport produces a lot of CO2. However you can just replace that with any other food product and the issues will be there too. Ultimately the best way to protect the environment is only eat stuff produced locally (ideally in your own garden) - but that is not practical.
April 24, 20197 yr It isn't practical. Yet. Therefore population control is essential. Too many people. And couple it with hi-tech production methods.
April 24, 20197 yr 6 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said: It isn't practical. Yet. Therefore population control is essential. Too many people. And couple it with hi-tech production methods. How do you do that though? That's probably less practical.
April 24, 20197 yr 30 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said: An interview with a former vegan/protestor type a few weeks back. He's had a complete change of heart, eats some meat now to help his health. Now getting plenty of flack from his former comrades. Quite interesting listening to the conversation. I do accept there is an issue with "methane", what is also not addressed is the environmentally poor method of producing fruit and vegetables. Everything needs to be looked at. I had a rather brilliant aunt lived in Lostock. She worked for the United Nations in Geneva and was on 2 weekly shifts (i.e two week in Bolton, 2 weeks in Geneva). A really lovely, sweet woman and highly intelligent. For a while she took up with a really nice Indian bloke called Mukti (which, as a kid, I found very funny - as you would I suppose). He introduced her to vegetarianism which she embraced wholeheartedly. Much later, when she married a local lad, she too had a change of heart. She became a full on vegan and lived on beans and pulses which she often proclaimed (rather loudly) met all of her nutritional needs. She died at 52 years of age. I have tended to follow the advice of my maternal grandfather (who brought me up). Have a small portion of everything and you won't go far wrong.
April 24, 20197 yr 5 hours ago, bwfcfan5 said: How do you do that though? That's probably less practical. Not really. Until a few years ago the population of Europe was fairly stable. Not now.
April 24, 20197 yr 3 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said: Not really. Until a few years ago the population of Europe was fairly stable. Not now. That isn't true. And not relevant either. Population growth rate in Europe is lower now than in the 60's. But we're talking climate change. Which means we're talking global. How do you reduce global population?
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.