Gobal Warming - what does it mean for our generation

zoii · Sep 8, 2015

There are so many serious issues we all face but to me Global Warming is the greatest threat of all. It isnt concerned with borders or politics and it effects everyone. The problem with this issue is that those who can vote and those who are in government are going to decide my future and my childrens future, yet voters and government either cant agree or choose not to act anyway.

There are two main camps - One camp says that global warming is a hoax. The view tends to belong to more conservative groups and from fossil fuel industries.

The second camp are from scientists who have, in several forums, arrived at a collective opinion that there is a direct link between human activity, CO2 production and a catastrophic rise in global temperature that will result in severe weather patterns such as drought, ice melt, sea level rises and destructive storms patterns.

So who do we believe because if the scientific experts collectively have agreed on this phenomena, then the generation it will hit hardest is our generation and our children's. But we are powerless. Those over 18 are making decisions for us, but are they making the right ones. Those in power are over 50 and you could argue that this is not going to impact on them as much as it is our generation.

If what we read is true this is an issue that is going to very seriously affect our generation and particularly our children. If what we read is true we have cause to be annoyed with those in older generations who would prefer to do nothing. Are we arriving at a time when those of us that cant vote need to start a social media revolution - Are we being betrayed by older generations choosing not to act - who should we believe??

Well I know if my bicycle performs weirdly I take it to the bicycle repair guy. He's qualified and has the experience - my guy has been riding for 40 years... and its even better when theres a few of those experts in the shop who can chat about my bike and get a consencus view of how to fix my problem.

So why with a serious issue like global warming are we listening to radio station jocks, loud politicians and anyone other than the collective experts in the field.... and I say collective - one scientist with a different view is not want I wanna hear - I want to hear the collective wisdom of those who know what they are talking about.

So - is our generation being protected - do we need to start our own action???

Mitspa · Sep 8, 2015

I know this is a teens thread...but do we really want kids to believe something that is clearly a lie?

At long last the Big Lie of Global Warming has been totally exposed and we can thank The Heartland Institute, a free market think tank that has organized and hosted eight international Conferences on Climate Change since 2008 to expose the lies behind global warming—now called “climate change”—as it became clear that seventeen years of continuous cooling has put a Big Chill on this Big Lie.
I suspect that the Heartland team, led by Joe Bast and including some remarkable, dedicated people, will only get a line or two in some future historian’s account of the deception that began in 1988 before a congressional committee. Thereafter the global warming hoax was given momentum by former Vice President Al Gore who, along with the IPCC, would receive a Nobel Peace Prize!

NotmebutHim · Sep 8, 2015

God has commanded us to be proper stewards of the Earth and to take care of our natural resources. But most of what passes for environmentalism and awareness of global warming/climate change is really a cover for Earth & goddess worship. For instance, Al Gore praises the Earth goddess Gaia in his book "Earth in the Balance".

zoii · Sep 9, 2015

Hi Mitspa dn Notmebuthim - ty for replying. I'll do some research and reply shortly

- but ty

To the teens
My own advice is this - Do not listen to anything I say - or anyone else here. This isnt suggested as disrepect to me or anyone else.... rather I am saying that this is such an important topic you need to arrive at your OWN conclusions and not feed off anyone else's.

So first step - Who do you listen to - well you have to decide who is a credible resource that can summarise research/data for you - theres lots but always ask - who is this dude/company I'm listening to - are they objective - do they have some vested interest - are they paid by someone with a vested interest.

So maybe reliable sources would be NASA or the Commonwealth Serum Laboratories of Australia... u get the picture...someone u trust is independent

Then check out what they say and decide what you think.

Now I'm going to use the resource thats been quoted "Heartland Institute" - again DONT listen to ME - check it for yourself - eg - is anyone on the board scientists (NO).... do they have a conflict of interest?...well in their statement of how they funded, they list that 95% of donations come from large corporations with the largest donor being David Koche who is a billionaire owner of a petrochemical company so.... anyway from here you decide if statements from such a resource are likely to be objective or biased. Also look at their Mission Statement - Its focussed on debunking climate science - So the risk with a mission like that is ...rather than identifying the science and matching a position/action to that science....they may decide on a position and try to find any science or scientist who will support the position.

But if you happy with their stuff then u have an alternative opinion to consider. So then decide if they outweight the volume of evidence from a concensus of international scientific experts.... the result will be your opinion.

NOW - if you have arrived an an opinion that this issue SUX and we arent doing enough - FIGHT FOR YOUR RIGHTS !!!

zoii · Sep 9, 2015

NotmebutHim said:

Hiya - ty for replying
I cannot comment on the spiritual beliefs of an ex-politician from year 2000 in the USA.

To me this is an international scientific issue with massive potential repercussions for my generation. As a young Australian, the issues/beliefs of a single person in the USA regarding their spiritual views is of no consequence to my generation and this issue. This problem is well beyond any one person's views.

Omni · Sep 9, 2015

zoii said:

That's a very enlightened and mature attitude to have, because getting dragged into the smear-politics of an issue is a mistake I make frequently on these forums. Good to see you rise above that. If you can find people your own age who are as sophisticated as yourself, you'll all do very well in life. Stick together, and keep that cool attitude; it's a great trait to carry.

Not often a fifteen year old humbles me.

Mitspa · Sep 9, 2015

I agree that Zoii does often display a amazing maturity ...but she sometimes seems to get on the wrong side of the truth?

Omni · Sep 9, 2015

zoii said:

In my opinion, you do. A Frenchman called Voltaire once said "injustice, in the end, produces independence".

You're part of a generation that's being dealt a great, whopping, dirty, unjust hand from a cheating dealer, and the longer you play the game, the more you indulge his dishonesty. Don't play the game anymore. Make it clear, as many of you whom you can muster to do so, that climate is at the top of your priorities. What's the point in a strong economy if there isn't going to be a planet with which to benefit from it?

The young, and by the young I mean you and all the rest of the people who can't vote, must push this. You, your children, their children, are going to be the ones who suffer if nothing is done; you'll be the ones who have to deal with the disastrous consequences of ancestors who refused to face this problem. Those in the positions of financial and political authority are much too worn to stand up for the same pure ideals that the young will, so you must remind them of the ideals they let themselves forget.

Don't back down, because you're right. I know you're right, and they know you're right. Those who make millions from finance, from oil, from industry, are not the ignorant people that they would have you believe they are. They are not blind. Nobody makes themselves a massive fortune, runs a top company, without intelligence. Those at the top, they know that the climate is in danger, but they refuse to admit it publicly. To do so is "bad for business", "bad for the economy", "but what will we do without oil?"

Climate change denial, is just that; it is denial. All of those who are intelligent enough to understand the facts (the CEOs, the oil Sheikhs, the Presidents and the top politicians), yet deny, do so out of self interest.

It's self interest that you need to oppose.

PennEd · Sep 9, 2015

zoii said:

Hi Zoii,

You indeed have one thing right. it IS YOUR generation that will suffer if global warming crowd gets their way and enact laws making energy much more expensive. These people do NOT have YOUR best interests at heart. They want power and control over you. THAT is what they are all about.
It is true the majority of scientists believe in GW, BUT not all, not the brave ones who have to endure ridicule, being ostracized, calls for JAILING if they speak against the hoax, and worst of all, a complete lack of funding. If I told you I'd give you millions of dollars but I want your research to show what I WANT it to, AND you get ZILCH if you don't, do you think you'd have a conflict of interest? Think about this: If the powers control YOUR energy they control YOUR freedom.

Mitspa · Sep 9, 2015

Omni said:

In my opinion, you do. A Frenchman called Voltaire once said "injustice, in the end, produces independence".

You're part of a generation that's being dealt a great, whopping, dirty, unjust hand from a cheating dealer, and the longer you play the game, the more you indulge his dishonesty. Don't play the game anymore. Make it clear, as many of you whom you can muster to do so, that climate is at the top of your priorities. What's the point in a strong economy if there isn't going to be a planet with which to benefit from it?

The young, and by the young I mean you and all the rest of the people who can't vote, must push this. You, your children, their children, are going to be the ones who suffer if nothing is done; you'll be the ones who have to deal with the disastrous consequences of ancestors who refused to face this problem. Those in the positions of financial and political authority are much too worn to stand up for the same pure ideals that the young will, so you must remind them of the ideals they let themselves forget.

Don't back down, because you're right. I know you're right, and they know you're right. Those who make millions from finance, from oil, from industry, are not the ignorant people that they would have you believe they are. They are not blind. Nobody makes themselves a massive fortune, runs a top company, without intelligence. Those at the top, they know that the climate is in danger, but they refuse to admit it publicly. To do so is "bad for business", "bad for the economy", "but what will we do without oil?"

Climate change denial, is just that; it is denial. All of those who are intelligent enough to understand the facts (the CEOs, the oil Sheikhs, the Presidents and the top politicians), yet deny, do so out of self interest.

It's self interest that you need to oppose.

Haha...see Zoii its not global warming...its climate change now. Why do you think these leftist have changed this term? Because its clear global warming is not true...so just change the term to climate change ...and yes the climate changes every day, every where...just like the weather

zoii · Sep 9, 2015

PennEd said:

My generation is willing to listen to any view. If you quote your sources we can make our minds up about the quality of your comments. I don't want any of my peers accepting my view - or yours - I want them to look at data sources and the credibility of where that data came from. And don't imagine that its just my generation your view has to convince either when u have agencies such as your space agency strongly supporting climate science consensus - the argument that their position is biased is a less convincing one when they construct their views on very well reviewed research and are generally viewed as being authentic in their views.

zoii · Sep 9, 2015

Gentleman please know I am not levelling any discredit of your comments. I have simply ask you state sources and my peers n I will see for ourselves. But my perspective is that the research behind climate change is massive, reproducible and from independent agencies, by well qualified researches. The outputs have been scrutinised by a world forum of peers and has been held to account by every nations politicians. With a serious issue like this its just not enough to say your beliefs and cite them as fact like..."u kids need to settle down coz we told u whats what". You really have to back it up because from where I stand, failure to do that means my generation is going to reep the repercussions of inaction.

Mitspa · Sep 9, 2015

zoii said:

Gentleman please know I am not levelling any discredit of your comments. I have simply ask you state sources and my peers n I will see for ourselves. But my perspective is that the research behind climate change is massive, reproducible and from independent agencies, by well qualified researches. The outputs have been scrutinised by a world forum of peers and has been held to account by every nations politicians. With a serious issue like this its just not enough to say your beliefs and cite them as fact like..."u kids need to settle down coz we told u whats what". You really have to back it up because from where I stand, failure to do that means my generation is going to reep the repercussions of inaction.

Why you use term climate change now?

zoii · Sep 9, 2015

Mitspa said:

Oh I thought you'd approve Mitspa...and you were right - its not just about surface and ocean warming, its about complete changes to weather patterns that become extreme. So yes I like your correction.

Plus Mitspa I do hope u know I respect you and aren't in any way levelling anything adverse at u.... Im just stating something that Im passionate about and really concerned about and I hope Im doing it in a way that's both polite and respectful to you.

Mitspa · Sep 9, 2015

John Coleman, co-founder of the Weather Channel, shocked the world and the scientific community when he claimed that there is little scientific evidence to prove that global warming is real, and that the whole thing has become nothing but a political tool that is not backed by true scientific evidence.
We understand that Coleman wrote an open letter to organizers of the Hammer Forum at UCLA that is aimed at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The Oct. 23 forum topic was "Tackling Climate Change Nationally and Globally," and Coleman urged fourm organizers to re-examine their plan to present two speakers who believe scientific evidence supports climate change. Coleman claims that reports of ice sheets melting away are lies, and that heat waves are not increasing, but diminishing instead. He also claimed that the polar bear population is rising rather than falling.
"The ocean is not rising significantly. The polar ice is increasing, not melting away. Polar bears are increasing in number. Heat waves have actually diminished, not increased. There is not an uptick in the number or strength of storms (in fact, storms are diminishing)," says Coleman. "I have studied this topic seriously for years. It has become a political and environment agenda item, but the science is not valid."

Mitspa · Sep 9, 2015

zoii said:

Oh I thought you'd approve Mitspa...and you were right - its not just about surface and ocean warming, its about complete changes to weather patterns that become extreme. So yes I like your correction.

Plus Mitspa I do hope u know I respect you and aren't in any way levelling anything adverse at u.... Im just stating something that Im passionate about and really concerned about and I hope Im doing it in a way that's both polite and respectful to you.

Thanks Zoii

zoii · Sep 9, 2015

Thanks Mitspa. He's obviously very passionate in his view. Do you know where he gets his facts from or what research he bases his views on?

Mitspa · Sep 9, 2015

zoii said:

sure ...here is a copy of one of his blogs where he links sources...

The sky is falling. “Climate Change” is running wild and disaster is certain unless we immediately stop burning coal and oil and move quickly to “green energy” to eliminate use of fossil fuels. Heat waves, huge floods, powerful storms, droughts and rising seas are on the verge of killing millions of us and destroying our civilization. That is my summary of the new Federal Assessment of Climate Change issued by a Obama administration team of more than 300 specialists guided by a 60-member federal advisory committee produced the report. It was reviewed by federal agencies and a panel of the National Academy of Sciences.
This 600 page litany of doom and gloom has received extensive coverage by the panting anchors of the national media who feel important when tell their audience that “the sky is falling.” Horrible pictures of storms, floods, drought and heat waves leaped out of the TV sets as the New York and Washington DC headquartered media was particularly excited to tell us how the huge increases in floods and storms was the worst in that part of the nation.
If you accept the picture painted by this report, the weather was just right, steady and nice in the historic past but because our industrialized society has powered its heating and air conditioning, its transportation by train, plane, cars and trucks, generated it’s electric power to run our lights, computers, television and smart phones with fossil fuels it has triggered this nightmare of awful storms, droughts and heat waves.
I am deeply disturbed to have to suffer through this total distortion of the data and agenda driven, destructive episode of bad science gone berserk. The only good news is that I least where I am and on the channels and websites I saw I was not further insulted by fawning TV Weathercasters visiting the White House and interviewing the President. I best I can tell, on a national level, that turned out to be a non-event (thank goodness).
Please allow me to hold your attention for a few minutes to explain why I don’t buy into this Climate Change alarmism. The climate of Earth has never been “normal” or stable. It has continuously changed through this planet’s 4.5 billion year history. Powerful storms, floods, droughts, heat waves and ice and snow storms have come and gone as long as Earth has existed.
The current bad science is all based on a theory that the increase in the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere from the exhaust of the burning of fossil fuels leads to a dramatic increase in “the greenhouse effect” causing temperatures to skyrocket uncontrollably. This theory has failed to verify and is obviously dead wrong. But the politically funded and agenda driven scientists who have built their careers on this theory and live well on the 2.6 billion dollars of year of Federal grants for global warming/climate change research cling to this theory and bend the data spread to support the glorified claims in their reports and papers.
When the temperature data could no longer be bent to support global warming, they switched to climate change and now blame every weather and climate event on CO2 despite the hard, cold fact that the “radiative forcing” theory they built their claims on has totally failed to verify.
They call people such as me who debunk their non-scientific silliness as “deniers” and claim we are flat-earthers and shills for “big oil”. It is insulting and maddening. But I will not be silenced. And neither will the thousand others, many of them with Ph.D.’s and on the faculties of major universities who are working to stop this bad science that labels CO2 as a pollutant and blames it for every shift in the weather.
We will be gathering, we global warming skeptics, at Heartland Institutes 9th International Conference on Climate Change, July 7 – 9, 2014 in Las Vegas. You can learn about that conference at Video of the Tenth International Conference on Climate Change - International Conference on Climate Change. I will be one of the speakers at the breakfast session on Tuesday July 8th. Look at the list of speakers on the website and you will see an impressive group. A group of the powerful Ph.D.’s in the group have recently published a complete scientific document that totaling destroys the climate change alarmism of the US Democrat Party and the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. You can find that publication on line at Climate Change Reconsidered.
In the meantime, through blogs, and radio and television interviews whenever any of us can get on the air we will continue to try to debunk this way of climate alarmism. For instance, I will be on the air on WLS Radio in Chicago with Bruce Wolf & Dan Proft on Wednesday morning (today) at 8:45 AM Chicago time (6:45 AM San Diego time) and do my best to tell the real story of climate and weather. You can listen to that broadcast on line at
Listen live
All of this not withstanding, my life is sooo good. Every day is fun and relaxed since I have ended the tread mill life of grinding out all those TV weathercasts a day. I now do my dancing for fun only. LOL

Omni · Sep 9, 2015

I challenge anybody who denies climate change to make statements from their own wording, with clear underpinning scientific understanding, to show that climate change is false. My suspicion is that the people here who are denying it are doing so because they have a sociopolitical or religious viewpoint that they believe (due to false media propagation) is incompatible with believing in climate change. This is silly, for a lot of reasons, but primarily because sociopolitical or religious beliefs are subjective; scientific facts are not.

PennEd asserts that climate change is false, yet provides no illustration that he understands the scientific principles necessary for such an argument to be made logically, while Mitspa implies that climate change is false on the presumption that scientists have "changed the name". That's also silly, for a number of reasons.

Global warming is what it sounds like -- it is an overall global trend towards an increase in thermal energy; a rise in average global temperature. And climate change is also what it sounds like -- changes in global climate (not to be confused with weather).

Mitspa's misconception lies in the assumption that global warming and climate change are mutually exclusive. They aren't. Global warming is driving a very specific climactic change. And of course, I can hear the rebuttal "but climate always changes". Yes, it does. It's true that the Earth has undergone several climactic shifts in its history, an argument I've heard several times before from climate-change-deniers (which, frankly, is a bit absurd since the same people obviously recognize that climactic shifts happened in the past, and as all of us evolutionists know, as per Ken Hom and the YEC Climate Deniers, "you can't prove what happened in the past", but anyway). These climactic shifts have happened with specific trends in the past. They come about gradually, and naturally. The issue with modern climactic changes is that they aren't following past trends. The Earth is warming alarmingly quickly, and since we know the CO2, methane, and other gases cause a heat-trapping effect, and since we can observe that the levels of these gases has dramatically increased (perfectly proportionally to the dramatic increase in heat, in fact), we can deduce that human production of these gases is driving climactic change at an unusual pace.

Why is this a problem?

Well, it's a problem for several reasons. If we allow the Earth to keep warming this dramatically, to keep exponentially getting warmer, our planet is going to suffer for it. If the planet suffers, then so do we. Hint: We are part of this planet. We depend on this planet for everything. We depend on it for our food, our water, our land, our shelter, our heat. Everything.

There are 50 years of oil left, and a hundred years of gas. If we burn it all (as it seems many people are intent on doing) we will cause the ice caps to melt thousands of years more quickly than they would have, had we not industrialized ourselves so hastily with the advent of fossil fuels. This means a sea level rise that will wipe out most of the American Eastern Seaboard. It means the virtual destruction of Pakistan and Bangladesh. It means the total submerging of London. It means fiercer storms, harsher weather, melted icecaps. It means mass human extinction.

It's not about making energy more expensive, it's about finding alternatives to fossil fuels and making them affordable for everybody. In order to do that, we need energy companies to invest heavily in those alternatives. They do exist, but the biggest obstacle to realizing a world without fossil fuels is a simple obstacle; human greed -- the pursuit of profit.

We are putting massive profits for the few, above a safe and healthy planet for the many.

Mitspa · Sep 9, 2015

So one wants us to prove our points using data researched by experts and the other wants us to not use experts...lol

I think I will use what I like to make the points I like.... this is a hoax and all honest people who have done any research know it is.

Gobal Warming - what does it mean for our generation

Banned

Mitspa

Guest

Senior Member

Banned

Banned

Banned

Mitspa

Guest

Banned

Senior Member

Mitspa

Guest

Banned

Banned

Mitspa

Guest

Banned

Mitspa

Guest

Mitspa

Guest

Banned

Mitspa

Guest

Banned

Mitspa

Guest