| The Living Planet report 09:03 - Sep 10 with 6446 views | Catullus |
As if we didn't know but human expansion is killing us. Wildlife is being lost at the greatest rate ever. A football sized pitch of the Amazon rain forest is being cleared for beef cattle grazing land EVERY MINUTE.
They are even saying that our expansion into other creatures habitats , the illegal wildlife trade and the removal of wildlife could be responsible for the Covid pandemic and that if we continue this kind of thing will be more commonplace.
We are destroying, or maybe have destroyed the balance of our planet and it is the whole of humankind who will suffer as a result of our own greed and stupidity. |  |
| |  |
| The Living Planet report on 21:36 - Sep 13 with 948 views | Catullus |
| The Living Planet report on 18:28 - Sep 13 by A_Fans_Dad |
I absolutely agree that some animals are being driven to extinction.
But mostly by being hunted, some by habitat destruction.
The ones being hunted are mostly killed for part of them for wierd medical or ritual purposes, especially for the Asian countries.
Just one of the reasons I really dislike the Chinese.
Some are killed by pure vandalism, ie lighting "wild" fires, arson pure & simple.
Some habitat destruction is due to the requirements of feeding people, but there is also a lot due to so called "green" iniatives.
However nobody ever talks about the new species that have been found, only those disappearing.
Nobody talks about all the good work being done to preserve species.
There is no balance.
However there is also some out and out propoganda and mis-information out there.
Only yesterday you had Attenborough saying that Polar Bears will be gone by the 2030s, he is delusional or senile and a total hypocrite. |
Is this propaganda and misinformation,
https://www.nationalgeographic
I don't know that Polar bears will be extinct as soon as Attenborough says but they are vulnerable.
https://www.arctictoday.com/na | |
| |
| The Living Planet report on 10:34 - Sep 14 with 919 views | A_Fans_Dad |
That is typical prooganda.
Do you know the recent history of Polar Bears?
The reason that they are attacking people and moving in land is because there are too many of them for their normal food source.
For a definitive source on Polar Bears go to this sceptical site to learn the truth.
https://polarbearscience.com/ | | | |
| The Living Planet report on 10:47 - Sep 14 with 916 views | Catullus |
| The Living Planet report on 10:34 - Sep 14 by A_Fans_Dad |
That is typical prooganda.
Do you know the recent history of Polar Bears?
The reason that they are attacking people and moving in land is because there are too many of them for their normal food source.
For a definitive source on Polar Bears go to this sceptical site to learn the truth.
https://polarbearscience.com/ |
Maybe so but we know humans have expanded into the Polar bears realm, every year bears follow more or less the same migration route,
https://www.independent.co.uk/
Humans being as we are we mostly seemed to believe the animals should get out of our way, if they didn't we killed them. At least these days there is more understanding and people are more frequently looking for ways to co-exist. Still, we are doing a lot of damage. Just look at all the plastic in the oceans and it has also gotten into the food chain.
PS, Prooganda, is that by Kenya?  | |
| |
| The Living Planet report on 11:02 - Sep 14 with 912 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| The Living Planet report on 21:21 - Sep 13 by Scotia |
Habitat destruction is a far greater cause of the decline of biodiversity than hunting. It is not even close.
There are many species in massive decline in the UK and "hunting" is almost non existent. |
Decline yes, Extinction not so much, which is what I was discussing.
You mentioned the UK, where the species that are in most danger like Raptors are being deliberately killed or having their eggs stolen.
Or red squirrels out paced and killed by grey squirrel deseases.
You don't mention all the small animals killed by those lovely furry cats that people keep as totally uncontrolled pets.
You also don't mention the habitat destruction to make way for Wind & Solar Farms.
You also don't mention all the birds, bats and millions of insects killed by wind turbines, or the birds and insects fried alive by solar collector farms.
You also don't mention all the other natural things that cause decline, like elm's desease, Bee deseases, Pine Beetles etc.
You also don't mention the thousands of animals killed by the cold, you probably aren't even aware of it because it doesn't fit the Man Made Global Warming mantra.
There was a classic case of animals being killed by nature that man could have saved, after Hurricane Laura passed through Louisiana it left behind a lot of standing water. What you get with standing water is Mosquitoes, something that is easy to prevent. They didn't and there were so many Mosquitoes they killed cows and horses by literally drinking their blood.
But then again you have totally ignored the fact that all over the world new species have been identified to replace species that die out as has always happened.
[Post edited 14 Sep 2020 12:19]
| | | |
| The Living Planet report on 11:13 - Sep 14 with 910 views | Professor |
| The Living Planet report on 10:34 - Sep 14 by A_Fans_Dad |
That is typical prooganda.
Do you know the recent history of Polar Bears?
The reason that they are attacking people and moving in land is because there are too many of them for their normal food source.
For a definitive source on Polar Bears go to this sceptical site to learn the truth.
https://polarbearscience.com/ |
You realise this a blog from someone who has no involvement in research or specific expertise in polar or any other bear species? She has a PhD in some aspects of dog evolution and domestication. No more a polar bear expert than you, me or Catullus. It's fake science. | | | |
| The Living Planet report on 11:14 - Sep 14 with 909 views | Professor |
| The Living Planet report on 11:13 - Sep 14 by Professor |
You realise this a blog from someone who has no involvement in research or specific expertise in polar or any other bear species? She has a PhD in some aspects of dog evolution and domestication. No more a polar bear expert than you, me or Catullus. It's fake science. |
There is some dispute over numbers declining or rising, but largely driven by lack of reliable data on populations prior to the 1970s. Consensus is a declining population, but there are some real zoologists who work in this area that dispute this. | | | |
| The Living Planet report on 11:34 - Sep 14 with 907 views | Catullus |
| The Living Planet report on 11:02 - Sep 14 by A_Fans_Dad |
Decline yes, Extinction not so much, which is what I was discussing.
You mentioned the UK, where the species that are in most danger like Raptors are being deliberately killed or having their eggs stolen.
Or red squirrels out paced and killed by grey squirrel deseases.
You don't mention all the small animals killed by those lovely furry cats that people keep as totally uncontrolled pets.
You also don't mention the habitat destruction to make way for Wind & Solar Farms.
You also don't mention all the birds, bats and millions of insects killed by wind turbines, or the birds and insects fried alive by solar collector farms.
You also don't mention all the other natural things that cause decline, like elm's desease, Bee deseases, Pine Beetles etc.
You also don't mention the thousands of animals killed by the cold, you probably aren't even aware of it because it doesn't fit the Man Made Global Warming mantra.
There was a classic case of animals being killed by nature that man could have saved, after Hurricane Laura passed through Louisiana it left behind a lot of standing water. What you get with standing water is Mosquitoes, something that is easy to prevent. They didn't and there were so many Mosquitoes they killed cows and horses by literally drinking their blood.
But then again you have totally ignored the fact that all over the world new species have been identified to replace species that die out as has always happened.
[Post edited 14 Sep 2020 12:19]
|
The things you say don't get mentioned, those are all things caused by human expansion which was my original point. Even grey squirrels in this country happened because of our expansion, they were brought back here by the then Duke of Bedford and released in Woburn park.
The decline of bee's is largely down to pesticides. Many birds and other creatures are in decline because we have removed so many hedgerows for farming.
Now the cold is a real misnomer on your part. Global warming, like climate change, doesn't mean the absence of colder weather. In fact it can mean more severe cold weather. If that means snow then it also can mean floods.
If animals go extinct naturally that is fine. It's when humnakinds actions cause these problems that it's a real issue. The natural course of things represents the balance in nature and humans are affecting that balance. That is why I often also question science, should we be pursuing cloning, gene therapy etc? Because we can do something, should we do it? | |
| |
| The Living Planet report on 12:21 - Sep 14 with 901 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| The Living Planet report on 11:13 - Sep 14 by Professor |
You realise this a blog from someone who has no involvement in research or specific expertise in polar or any other bear species? She has a PhD in some aspects of dog evolution and domestication. No more a polar bear expert than you, me or Catullus. It's fake science. |
See, there you go, rubbishing someone else's expertise based on their education.
You really are a peice of work. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| The Living Planet report on 12:38 - Sep 14 with 899 views | Professor |
| The Living Planet report on 12:21 - Sep 14 by A_Fans_Dad |
See, there you go, rubbishing someone else's expertise based on their education.
You really are a peice of work. |
She is an absolute bluffer- don't just take my word.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/0
https://skeptics.stackexchange
https://academic.oup.com/biosc
She has never researched the biology of Polar Bears. It's just a blog without any primary research and essential'y opinion. She has a PhD in an unrelated area. She does not conduct research on polar bears. She has never published any primary research on polar bears. She is not an expert. She may be an excellent zoologist (though only has ever been a part time academic and has run private testing services on biological materials as far as I can see), but she is not a polar bear expert. | | | |
| The Living Planet report on 12:55 - Sep 14 with 896 views | Professor |
| The Living Planet report on 12:38 - Sep 14 by Professor |
She is an absolute bluffer- don't just take my word.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/0
https://skeptics.stackexchange
https://academic.oup.com/biosc
She has never researched the biology of Polar Bears. It's just a blog without any primary research and essential'y opinion. She has a PhD in an unrelated area. She does not conduct research on polar bears. She has never published any primary research on polar bears. She is not an expert. She may be an excellent zoologist (though only has ever been a part time academic and has run private testing services on biological materials as far as I can see), but she is not a polar bear expert. |
She has seven peer reviewed articles over her career which she claims is 35 years. One research output per five years. She would be out on her arse as an academic with that level in the UK or US. As far as I can see five are all about dog domestication or evolution with one relating to historical arctic climate and sea ice and one about colonisation of Easter Island (though may not be her). The dog papers are good, but have no relationship to bears.
There is one preprint which a theoretical paper about polar bears. No primary data, just her theories. This is not reviewed-just posted on PeerJ
So if you think this is some snobbery or being nasty, its more a lesson in checking your source and not using unreliable propaganda. As I said there are some reputable scientists who dispute polar bear decline. She is not one. | | | |
| The Living Planet report on 13:00 - Sep 14 with 894 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| The Living Planet report on 12:55 - Sep 14 by Professor |
She has seven peer reviewed articles over her career which she claims is 35 years. One research output per five years. She would be out on her arse as an academic with that level in the UK or US. As far as I can see five are all about dog domestication or evolution with one relating to historical arctic climate and sea ice and one about colonisation of Easter Island (though may not be her). The dog papers are good, but have no relationship to bears.
There is one preprint which a theoretical paper about polar bears. No primary data, just her theories. This is not reviewed-just posted on PeerJ
So if you think this is some snobbery or being nasty, its more a lesson in checking your source and not using unreliable propaganda. As I said there are some reputable scientists who dispute polar bear decline. She is not one. |
Like I say you really are a piece of work typical of Climate Change activists attacking the person.
Perhaps the WWF would be better for you?
https://arcticwwf.org/species/
WWF estimates 22,000 to 31,000, Susan Crockford estimates 26,000 to 58,000.
But either way it is a long way from 1970s to 1990s when the predictions of extinction were being made.
The decline had little to to do with warmnin as the 70s were one of the coldest periods of the 20th century and all to do with being hunted.
Perhaps you will believe this story instead
https://www.canadiangeographic [Post edited 14 Sep 2020 13:24]
| | | |
| The Living Planet report on 13:11 - Sep 14 with 891 views | Professor |
| The Living Planet report on 13:00 - Sep 14 by A_Fans_Dad |
Like I say you really are a piece of work typical of Climate Change activists attacking the person.
Perhaps the WWF would be better for you?
https://arcticwwf.org/species/
WWF estimates 22,000 to 31,000, Susan Crockford estimates 26,000 to 58,000.
But either way it is a long way from 1970s to 1990s when the predictions of extinction were being made.
The decline had little to to do with warmnin as the 70s were one of the coldest periods of the 20th century and all to do with being hunted.
Perhaps you will believe this story instead
https://www.canadiangeographic [Post edited 14 Sep 2020 13:24]
|
I would suggest you read what you post. Both the WWF and the Canadian Geographic suggest that populations are in decline -WWF shows more declining than rising populations. Status is threatened or vulnerable in all areas.
I am not attacking the person-I don't know her. She has a less than stellar research profile and is clearly no expert on polar bears. Neither am I, neither are you. But I can tell reliable science from someone's blog. | | | |
| The Living Planet report on 13:44 - Sep 14 with 867 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| The Living Planet report on 11:34 - Sep 14 by Catullus |
The things you say don't get mentioned, those are all things caused by human expansion which was my original point. Even grey squirrels in this country happened because of our expansion, they were brought back here by the then Duke of Bedford and released in Woburn park.
The decline of bee's is largely down to pesticides. Many birds and other creatures are in decline because we have removed so many hedgerows for farming.
Now the cold is a real misnomer on your part. Global warming, like climate change, doesn't mean the absence of colder weather. In fact it can mean more severe cold weather. If that means snow then it also can mean floods.
If animals go extinct naturally that is fine. It's when humnakinds actions cause these problems that it's a real issue. The natural course of things represents the balance in nature and humans are affecting that balance. That is why I often also question science, should we be pursuing cloning, gene therapy etc? Because we can do something, should we do it? |
You really believe that getting hotter can make it colder, in fact record breaking cold and snow.
Like up to 17" of snow in Wyoming, Montana, South Dakota, Colorado and New Mexico at the beginning of September? The earliest snowfall ever in the last two states.
OK, I give up. | | | |
| The Living Planet report on 14:02 - Sep 14 with 860 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| The Living Planet report on 13:11 - Sep 14 by Professor |
I would suggest you read what you post. Both the WWF and the Canadian Geographic suggest that populations are in decline -WWF shows more declining than rising populations. Status is threatened or vulnerable in all areas.
I am not attacking the person-I don't know her. She has a less than stellar research profile and is clearly no expert on polar bears. Neither am I, neither are you. But I can tell reliable science from someone's blog. |
Of course WWF says so and of course the other article says that others say so.
I just have 2 questions, with no prevarication, no weasel words, just straight answers.
First the WWF say that the populations are declining, the question is since when.
The second question which requires a yes or no answer is has the Polar Bear population increased or remained stable since 2008, while being declared endangered in 2008 they have been legally hunted and killed at a rate of 400+ per year? | | | |
| The Living Planet report on 14:17 - Sep 14 with 858 views | Professor |
| The Living Planet report on 14:02 - Sep 14 by A_Fans_Dad |
Of course WWF says so and of course the other article says that others say so.
I just have 2 questions, with no prevarication, no weasel words, just straight answers.
First the WWF say that the populations are declining, the question is since when.
The second question which requires a yes or no answer is has the Polar Bear population increased or remained stable since 2008, while being declared endangered in 2008 they have been legally hunted and killed at a rate of 400+ per year? |
I am not a zoologist or climate scientist. I can only reply with what I have read.
1. I posted earlier that population data prior to the 1970s is unreliable, so we can only go on the last 40 years or so. Historical evidence suggest it was larger, but I would not discount it was not. There appears to have been a decline in the 70s and 80s, though this has clearly slowed and reversed in two populations. Others are still declining, others remain stable.
2. It is a mixed pattern. The data suggest some populations are declining others rising. It's not a homogenous population -they are distinct individual populations. Certainly if as is the case in some Canadian regions, the growth is too great, then culling makes sense and fits with the practices of an indigenous population.
My point was nothing to do with bears and climate change, it really is not at the forefront of my mind, but more to the continued posting of pseudoscience and random internet articles with no basis. Not just on this of course. | | | |
| The Living Planet report on 15:02 - Sep 14 with 847 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| The Living Planet report on 14:17 - Sep 14 by Professor |
I am not a zoologist or climate scientist. I can only reply with what I have read.
1. I posted earlier that population data prior to the 1970s is unreliable, so we can only go on the last 40 years or so. Historical evidence suggest it was larger, but I would not discount it was not. There appears to have been a decline in the 70s and 80s, though this has clearly slowed and reversed in two populations. Others are still declining, others remain stable.
2. It is a mixed pattern. The data suggest some populations are declining others rising. It's not a homogenous population -they are distinct individual populations. Certainly if as is the case in some Canadian regions, the growth is too great, then culling makes sense and fits with the practices of an indigenous population.
My point was nothing to do with bears and climate change, it really is not at the forefront of my mind, but more to the continued posting of pseudoscience and random internet articles with no basis. Not just on this of course. |
You could not just bring yourself to give a straight answer.
But in other words, you haven't a clue when the decline is supposed to be from.
And you also have to agree that the overall population has NOT declined due to ice loss even though they are still being hunted and killed at the rate of 400+ per year.
I couldn't give a toss about what you think of my sources, especially when your sources end up saying the same thing.
There has been no recent decline in the overall population, ergo there is no reason to assume that they will all be gone by 2035, it is scare mongering.
As they say predictions are very difficult and predictions about the future are even worse.
Thank you. | | | |
| The Living Planet report on 15:10 - Sep 14 with 847 views | Scotia |
| The Living Planet report on 11:02 - Sep 14 by A_Fans_Dad |
Decline yes, Extinction not so much, which is what I was discussing.
You mentioned the UK, where the species that are in most danger like Raptors are being deliberately killed or having their eggs stolen.
Or red squirrels out paced and killed by grey squirrel deseases.
You don't mention all the small animals killed by those lovely furry cats that people keep as totally uncontrolled pets.
You also don't mention the habitat destruction to make way for Wind & Solar Farms.
You also don't mention all the birds, bats and millions of insects killed by wind turbines, or the birds and insects fried alive by solar collector farms.
You also don't mention all the other natural things that cause decline, like elm's desease, Bee deseases, Pine Beetles etc.
You also don't mention the thousands of animals killed by the cold, you probably aren't even aware of it because it doesn't fit the Man Made Global Warming mantra.
There was a classic case of animals being killed by nature that man could have saved, after Hurricane Laura passed through Louisiana it left behind a lot of standing water. What you get with standing water is Mosquitoes, something that is easy to prevent. They didn't and there were so many Mosquitoes they killed cows and horses by literally drinking their blood.
But then again you have totally ignored the fact that all over the world new species have been identified to replace species that die out as has always happened.
[Post edited 14 Sep 2020 12:19]
|
I'm sorry a lot of that is just wrong or irrelevant.
Decline comes before extinction, extinction doesn't happen overnight. Take four of the UKs critically endangered or endangered mammals the Wildcat, red squirrel, water vole and mouse earred bat all in that position due to loss of habitat or human competition. The night jar is one of the UKs most endangered birds due to loss of habitats.
I'm not sure why you mentioned the grey squirrel and domestic cats? You so realise that is habitat destruction too?
I scrutinise the EIA's for most major developments in SW Wales they aren't built without extensive biodiversity studies, which are often prohibitive to development. Many species are extensively protected by law. Impacts on endangered species are absolutely minimised through avoidance and mitigation, Welsh ministers aren't afraid to refuse consent if needed on biodiversity grounds take the M4 link road as an example.
The impacts of wind and solar farms in the correct place (which I ensure they are in) is negligible.
I don't mention natural decline because whilst it's a shame, its not relevant in this thread.
That last paragraph is beyond stupid. Genuinely the silliest thing you have said and there is a lot of competition for that auspicious title. [Post edited 14 Sep 2020 16:14]
| | | |
| The Living Planet report on 16:39 - Sep 14 with 835 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| The Living Planet report on 15:10 - Sep 14 by Scotia |
I'm sorry a lot of that is just wrong or irrelevant.
Decline comes before extinction, extinction doesn't happen overnight. Take four of the UKs critically endangered or endangered mammals the Wildcat, red squirrel, water vole and mouse earred bat all in that position due to loss of habitat or human competition. The night jar is one of the UKs most endangered birds due to loss of habitats.
I'm not sure why you mentioned the grey squirrel and domestic cats? You so realise that is habitat destruction too?
I scrutinise the EIA's for most major developments in SW Wales they aren't built without extensive biodiversity studies, which are often prohibitive to development. Many species are extensively protected by law. Impacts on endangered species are absolutely minimised through avoidance and mitigation, Welsh ministers aren't afraid to refuse consent if needed on biodiversity grounds take the M4 link road as an example.
The impacts of wind and solar farms in the correct place (which I ensure they are in) is negligible.
I don't mention natural decline because whilst it's a shame, its not relevant in this thread.
That last paragraph is beyond stupid. Genuinely the silliest thing you have said and there is a lot of competition for that auspicious title. [Post edited 14 Sep 2020 16:14]
|
What you don't believe that there are news species?
Or that it hasn't happened in the past?
As for Wind farms not destroying habitat, how do you remove millions of trees without it affecting the habitat of something?
You have a very large blind spot where "green" is considered.
What do you think anyone is prepared to to do to remove the problem of the cat killers.
The only reason I mentioned grey sqirrels is because they are not native and should be severely culled to save the Reds. | | | |
| The Living Planet report on 17:33 - Sep 14 with 825 views | Professor |
| The Living Planet report on 16:39 - Sep 14 by A_Fans_Dad |
What you don't believe that there are news species?
Or that it hasn't happened in the past?
As for Wind farms not destroying habitat, how do you remove millions of trees without it affecting the habitat of something?
You have a very large blind spot where "green" is considered.
What do you think anyone is prepared to to do to remove the problem of the cat killers.
The only reason I mentioned grey sqirrels is because they are not native and should be severely culled to save the Reds. |
About 100 years too late as squirrel pox is endemic in Red colonies. A lot of work trying to preserve the colony at Formby. Great shame | | | |
| The Living Planet report on 18:20 - Sep 14 with 821 views | Catullus |
| The Living Planet report on 13:44 - Sep 14 by A_Fans_Dad |
You really believe that getting hotter can make it colder, in fact record breaking cold and snow.
Like up to 17" of snow in Wyoming, Montana, South Dakota, Colorado and New Mexico at the beginning of September? The earliest snowfall ever in the last two states.
OK, I give up. |
Yes, warming can cause more extreme weather, or as I put it "it's not the absence of cold weather" and I didn't say getting hotter makes it colder either. The average temperature has risen because when it's hot, it's hotter than normal, we still get cold weather.
This article explains how global warming (or climate change as I prefer to call it) can indeed cause more extreme snowstorms.
https://www.ucsusa.org/resourc | |
| |
| The Living Planet report on 19:31 - Sep 14 with 814 views | Scotia |
| The Living Planet report on 16:39 - Sep 14 by A_Fans_Dad |
What you don't believe that there are news species?
Or that it hasn't happened in the past?
As for Wind farms not destroying habitat, how do you remove millions of trees without it affecting the habitat of something?
You have a very large blind spot where "green" is considered.
What do you think anyone is prepared to to do to remove the problem of the cat killers.
The only reason I mentioned grey sqirrels is because they are not native and should be severely culled to save the Reds. |
No there aren't new species, they maybe new to science but they aren't new to their ecosystem. Besides discovering a new invertebrate in Indonesia doesn't replace the extinct Chinese river dolphin, each species occupies a niche, it isn't a numbers game.
Every wind farm I've been involved with has been built on either improved pasture or coniferous forest planted for forestry both of very little value for biodiversity. The habitat that is lost can often be mitigated for, often with enhancement. That sounds like climate change deniers propaganda.
I'm not a fan of cats for the very reason you mention, I have a large garden and the perfect anti cat defence. A rescued greyhound. Perhaps more people could get one of those? | | | |
| The Living Planet report on 20:24 - Sep 14 with 805 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| The Living Planet report on 18:20 - Sep 14 by Catullus |
Yes, warming can cause more extreme weather, or as I put it "it's not the absence of cold weather" and I didn't say getting hotter makes it colder either. The average temperature has risen because when it's hot, it's hotter than normal, we still get cold weather.
This article explains how global warming (or climate change as I prefer to call it) can indeed cause more extreme snowstorms.
https://www.ucsusa.org/resourc |
Well perhaps you should look elsewhere, the UCS is the most Climate active group in the world.
Perhaps you should have visited the IPCC AR5 that they refer to.
I will quote them "It is very likely that the number of cold days and nights has decreased and the number of warm days and nights has increased on the global scale."
What they don't tell you of course is that the changes to cold nights is far greater than changes in hot days. ie it is not getting uniformly warmer, it is getting less cold.
I know about the UCS, they lie and exagerate, I can show you the proof, but you won't believe it as it is one of those denier sites that use NOAA/NCDC data to make it's point.
And as you can't use the same data to check it it is pointless. | | | |
| The Living Planet report on 20:51 - Sep 14 with 797 views | Catullus |
| The Living Planet report on 20:24 - Sep 14 by A_Fans_Dad |
Well perhaps you should look elsewhere, the UCS is the most Climate active group in the world.
Perhaps you should have visited the IPCC AR5 that they refer to.
I will quote them "It is very likely that the number of cold days and nights has decreased and the number of warm days and nights has increased on the global scale."
What they don't tell you of course is that the changes to cold nights is far greater than changes in hot days. ie it is not getting uniformly warmer, it is getting less cold.
I know about the UCS, they lie and exagerate, I can show you the proof, but you won't believe it as it is one of those denier sites that use NOAA/NCDC data to make it's point.
And as you can't use the same data to check it it is pointless. |
Well there you go then, it isn't the absence of cold just more extreme cold weather, you agree!
The scientists say the planet is warmer/warming on average. The climate is changing. As the climate changes we see more extreme events. You mentioned the recors snow, it doesn't have to be that cold for snow, it just needs the right conditions.
https://www.noaa.gov/news/june | |
| |
| The Living Planet report on 21:33 - Sep 14 with 793 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| The Living Planet report on 20:51 - Sep 14 by Catullus |
Well there you go then, it isn't the absence of cold just more extreme cold weather, you agree!
The scientists say the planet is warmer/warming on average. The climate is changing. As the climate changes we see more extreme events. You mentioned the recors snow, it doesn't have to be that cold for snow, it just needs the right conditions.
https://www.noaa.gov/news/june |
Except cold records are also being broken and not by the odd 0.01C or 0.10C like warm records, we are talking multiple degrees.
https://twitter.com/hashtag/Re
But you won't hear anything about them in our media. [Post edited 14 Sep 2020 21:35]
| | | |
| The Living Planet report on 22:46 - Sep 14 with 771 views | A_Fans_Dad |
| The Living Planet report on 19:31 - Sep 14 by Scotia |
No there aren't new species, they maybe new to science but they aren't new to their ecosystem. Besides discovering a new invertebrate in Indonesia doesn't replace the extinct Chinese river dolphin, each species occupies a niche, it isn't a numbers game.
Every wind farm I've been involved with has been built on either improved pasture or coniferous forest planted for forestry both of very little value for biodiversity. The habitat that is lost can often be mitigated for, often with enhancement. That sounds like climate change deniers propaganda.
I'm not a fan of cats for the very reason you mention, I have a large garden and the perfect anti cat defence. A rescued greyhound. Perhaps more people could get one of those? |
Would you mind answering a question about your original "Extreme" weather event the the Cumbrian floods.
You didn't actually read the Paul Homewood report did you? | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
