Climate change and photos of trees

[Lucan]

What if....?

[matelot]

I have to admit that I'm uneasy that "Professor Tim Sparks" concludes global warming is definite based on some photographs of trees....

 

As others have pointed out maybe the lack of smog has brought the leafing of trees forward...

[the village idiot]

What if....?

 

:thumbup:

[Kveldssanger]

What if....?

 

Funny caption but this trivilises the situation and the argument is redundant. I am sure nobody, even those who doubt climate change being heavily man-induced, wouldn't want to see a better, less-polluted, healthier (in the sense of ecosystems), sustainable world.

[the village idiot]

Funny caption but this trivilises the situation and the argument is redundant. I am sure nobody, even those who doubt climate change being heavily man-induced, wouldn't want to see a better, less-polluted, healthier (in the sense of ecosystems), sustainable world.

 

They might all want to see it, but they'll be damned if they have to give up a little of their own luxury to achieve it.

[Kveldssanger]

When governments are pushing the fracking agenda, one can hardly say they are leading by example. Once big business (oil, for one) is divorced from government, then we will see proper progress. Until then, it's a proverbial wildernss of smoke and mirrors. There's too much money for things to change substantially. Lip service it is, and nothing more.

 

Renewable energy technology is supressed as long as the oil oligarchs have a strangehold of government policy (across the world). Oil companies even have affiliations with the House of Lords in the UK - directly (for example, Lord Browne joined Riverstone in 2007 as a Partner - Riverstone is the co-owner of Cuadrilla).

 

Money corrupts.

Edited October 9, 2015 by Kveldssanger

[Vespasian]

When governments are pushing the fracking agenda, one can hardly say they are leading by example. Once big business (oil, for one) is divorced from government, then we will see proper progress. Until then, it's a proverbial wildernss of smoke and mirrors. There's too much money for things to change substantially. Lip service it is, and nothing more.

 

Renewable energy technology is supressed as long as the oil oligarchs have a strangehold of government policy (across the world). Oil companies even have affiliations with the House of Lords in the UK - directly (for example, Lord Browne joined Riverstone in 2007 as a Partner - Riverstone is the co-owner of Cuadrilla).

 

Money corrupts.

 

You're onto to something here, the connection betwixt oil and the climate change agenda..

There's gonna be a day when oil is gonna start bottoming out were no more oil can be found, extracted at a sustainable cost...

 

So what oil we have has to be husbanded to prolong that supply..

Tax on fuel, alternative energy, just two ruses to keep the oil train from running off the tracks...

 

Link the increasing cost of fuel to climate change and you have a moral argument to keep critics quiet.

 

So for me, at least, climate change isn't about climate change so much as it is about trying to manage an upcoming problem that needed to be addressed.

 

Figuring out how economies can operate in a future starved of resources..