- Location
- Lincolnshire
Every time the BBC suggests that eastern England will be as warm as Barcelona by 2050, i think just how ace that will be.
When the BBC mentions Eastern England, we all know that what they really means is that large barren oasis that is London, which hasn’t got that much greenery.Every time the BBC suggests that eastern England will be as warm as Barcelona by 2050, i think just how ace that will be.
....but you have done your bit.Planted 12,000 trees.
Trying regenerative arable.
Bought no new kit.
Using a lot less Nitrogen.
No holidays or flights anywhere.
Not been out for over 2 years.
Had no fun at all.
I may have a read, especially after reading this review : https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2...nt-and-why-it-matters-by-steve-koonin/#AuthorA good book to read is by Steven Koonin, available as hardback or Kindle, titled...
What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn't, and Why It Matters.
Available from good bookstores and here at Amazon
Yet another typical attempt at character assassination as is increasingly found through many walks of scientific life today. It’s prevalence is rather sickening and doesn’t bode well for a future based on rationality and fact. Koonin’s biography and qualifications are impeccable and he does not deny for one minute that there is human influence in aspects of the climate. What he questions are the hysterical conclusions drawn from a rather dodgy science of randomness and the way it is presented to a largely gullible public who do not and would not know how to question it.I may have a read, especially after reading this review : https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2...nt-and-why-it-matters-by-steve-koonin/#Author
Amazon reviewer quote...A brave book in the current "climate". Koonin is neither a climate change "denier", nor even particularly sceptical. What he does in this book is to expose the chasm between what the media, politicians, activists and campaigners tell us "The Science" says and what scientific studies actually indicate. He fully accepts that fossil fuel emissions resulting from human activities likely do have an impact on the climate. It's just that the scale of the challenge is uncertain and probably will not be an insurmountable problem for humanity in the foreseeable future. And certainly will not amount to what the media paints as an "existential" catastrophe. A good, thoughtful, well-researched and well-balanced book. Sadly, I suspect that it will have little impact on the legions of "true-believers", for whom this is a moral and not a scientific issue…. end quote
There is a scathing review of this book too, as one expects these days in bulk, from Peter Gleick, who is a water conservation scientist who founded the Pacific Institute, which is a water resources think tank. It illustrates the pretentiousness and supreme arrogance of scientists very well, which is an accusation levelled against Coonin by other scientists and can be taken with a pinch of salt. That’s because it seems to be the de-facto way for disagreeing scientists to criticise each other these days but especially ones that dare question the orthodoxy of the day. History tells us that the orthodoxy of the day for ongoing matters is wrong as often as it is right, no matter what the scale.
nothing to do with the fact that he was chief scientist for BP and the Under Secretary for the US department of energy then.Yet another typical attempt at character assassination as is increasingly found through many walks of scientific life today. It’s prevalence is rather sickening and doesn’t bode well for a future based on rationality and fact. Koonin’s biography and qualifications are impeccable and he does not deny for one minute that there is human influence in aspects of the climate. What he questions are the hysterical conclusions drawn from a rather dodgy science of randomness and the way it is presented to a largely gullible public who do not and would not know how to question it.
This is one of the reviews that sums the book up rather well and far more rationally than the bottom 5% of reviews which are mostly what one would expect of the blinkered 'true believers’...
Do read it. If the man displays some arrogant writing style, that is no different to a great many other academics and scientists in more than just climate forecasting.
I will certainly read the book. I am trying to challenge my own biases these days.Yet another typical attempt at character assassination as is increasingly found through many walks of scientific life today. It’s prevalence is rather sickening and doesn’t bode well for a future based on rationality and fact. Koonin’s biography and qualifications are impeccable and he does not deny for one minute that there is human influence in aspects of the climate. What he questions are the hysterical conclusions drawn from a rather dodgy science of randomness and the way it is presented to a largely gullible public who do not and would not know how to question it.
This is one of the reviews that sums the book up rather well and far more rationally than the bottom 5% of reviews which are mostly what one would expect of the blinkered 'true believers’...
Do read it. If the man displays some arrogant writing style, that is no different to a great many other academics and scientists in more than just climate forecasting.
Why should there be. He works for neither any longer and could rat on them big time if he had something to rat about. He’d sell a hell of a lot more books that way and be far less of a target for the fanatics.nothing to do with the fact that he was chief scientist for BP and the Under Secretary for the US department of energy then.
Absolutely no bias there
....this being that burning fossil fuels is not a problemthe current well financed orthodoxy.
Have you been in a coma for the last twenty years or are you a failed comedian?....this being that burning fossil fuels is not a problem
it's just that looking around at the way fossil fuel burning has gone up in the last 20 years, somehow I think the financial lobbying on the oil industry's behalf far out weighs that of any other industry.Have you been in a coma for the last twenty years or are you a failed comedian?
I will certainly read the book. I am trying to challenge my own biases these days.
Sadly much current science is entirely driven along by carefully cherry picked studies though. The whole basis for our current dietary advice to cut meat and saturated fat was so (Ancel Keys from the 60's/70's).
....this being that burning fossil fuels is not a problem
It was the Greens that forced Germany to close their nuclear plants to rely on fossil fuel, and likewise to abandon investment in new clean plant in the UK. Not forgetting the stopping of fracking in the UK. All of which is now coming home to roost with the price of energy shooting up at a rate never before experienced and likely to result in massive poverty and suffering worldwide.it's just that looking around at the way fossil fuel burning has gone up in the last 20 years, somehow I think the financial lobbying on the oil industry's behalf far out weighs that of any other industry.
If nothing else, it’s a finite resource. So one way or another it is inevitable.Its not that its not a problem or is a problem. It is what it is to give people a comfortable lifestyle in the modern world.
We will evolve away from fossil fuels in due course
A good book to read is by Steven Koonin, available as hardback or Kindle, titled...
What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn't, and Why It Matters.
Available from good bookstores and here at Amazon