Hydrogen power

[ClichéGuevara]

Ah right, carry on as normal then, everything fine! I'm sorry but the time for debate on this passed decades ago. It's beyond reasonable doubt and even if it wasn't, if there's the slightest chance we could be adversely affecting the climate we should be acting. The stakes are too high.

That's not what the science that underpins the IPPC reports say, nor plenty of other scientists from the appropriate fields.

Also, you are creating a strawman by trying to claim the alternative to the current proposals is business as usual. That is not what I have said in any of my posts.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

Despite the claims, there are still some serious scientific discussions to be had on both of those claims.

You're going to have to do much better than that.

Specifically:

(1)A reputable source showing that fossil fuels are infinite

(2) A reputable source showing that climate change is not damaging if (1) is true.

 

[ClichéGuevara]

You're going to have to do much better than that.

Specifically:

(1)A reputable source showing that fossil fuels are infinite

(2) A reputable source showing that climate change is not damaging if (1) is true.

Am I? How interesting.

I'll point you at the science that underpins the IPCC reports as a starter, and we can have a chat once you've read them. To be clear, it's the scientific reports I'm referring to, not just the IPCC reports themselves.

Oh, and I never claimed that fossil fuels were infinite, so it's you that will have to do better on that one.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

Am I? How interesting.

I'll point you at the science that underpins the IPCC reports as a starter, and we can have a chat once you've read them.

Oh, and I never claimed that fossil fuels were infinite, so it's you that will have to do better on that one.

I've actually read the IPPC report thanks, including the individual chapters, so you've no excuse.

And your post does imply fossil fuels are infinite.

 

[ClichéGuevara]

I've actually read the IPPC report thanks, including the individual chapters, so you've no excuse.

And your post does imply fossil fuels are infinite.

You have read my posts wrong if that's your understanding.

I did suggest that it's the science itself, rather than the IPCC reports that I am pointing you at.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

You have read my posts wrong if that's your understanding.

I did suggest that it's the science itself, rather than the IPCC reports that I am pointing you at.

You're not pointing me at anything. You're making unsupported assertions on a forum.

Specifically,

to this:

(1) A huge previously unaccounted for cost has been discovered - climate change and
(2) They are a finite resource, so by definition, cannot continue ad infinitum.

You responded

Despite the claims, there are still some serious scientific discussions to be had on both of those claims.

So, let's have reputable sources to back up the serious scientific discussions on (1) and (2)

 

[ClichéGuevara]

You're not pointing me at anything. You're making unsupported assertions on a forum.

Specifically,

to this:

(1) A huge previously unaccounted for cost has been discovered - climate change and
(2) They are a finite resource, so by definition, cannot continue ad infinitum.

You responded

Despite the claims, there are still some serious scientific discussions to be had on both of those claims.

So, let's have reputable sources to back up the serious scientific discussions on (1) and (2)

You seem to be ascribing your own views to my posts and then arguing against yourself, so I'll leave you to it.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

You seem to be ascribing your own views to my posts and then arguing against yourself, so I'll leave you to it.

Lol. It was a direct quote of yours.

You make entirely false claims, try to claim you know the science, and when your bluff is called, simply run away.

Reality:

Climate change is real and damaging.
Fossil fuels are finite.

 

[cougie uk]

You are comparing apples to oranges with your example of the smogs, and they do not conflict with anything I put.

The other two claims of yours are not supported by the science or the data.

You have no science and no data.

 

[ClichéGuevara]

Lol. It was a direct quote of yours.

You make entirely false claims, try to claim you know the science, and when your bluff is called, simply run away.

Reality:

Climate change is real and damaging.
Fossil fuels are finite.

You have no science and no data.

🤣

You are offering nothing but false assumptions. I don't think you realise how much you reveal about yourself and your understanding with your rude replies.

As I said, you are effectively arguing with yourself, as you have misrepresented my views, so fill your boots. You seem happy in your ignorance.

 

[Dadam]

As I said, you are effectively arguing with yourself, as you have misrepresented my views, so fill your boots. You seem happy in your ignorance.

Right, you've made assertions about "the science". Let's have some credible sources* to back your claims. Point out where in the document your claims are backed up.

* not random youtube videos

 

[roubaixtuesday]

🤣

You are offering nothing but false assumptions. I don't think you realise how much you reveal about yourself and your understanding with your rude replies.

As I said, you are effectively arguing with yourself, as you have misrepresented my views, so fill your boots. You seem happy in your ignorance.

The sources for your claims please, brave, brave sir Robin.

 

[Alex321]

You seem to be ascribing your own views to my posts and then arguing against yourself, so I'll leave you to it.

In other words, you can't back up those claims.

 

[FishFright]

Despite the claims, there are still some serious scientific discussions to be had on both of those claims.

Before anyone asks, no that is not based on any of the conspiracy stuff, quite a lot comes from the data and findings that form the basis of what is in the IPCC reports. The reports themselves do not always represent the science that underpins them.

Utterly wrong I'm afraid . The science behind climate change reached a high level of delta sigma proofs a long time ago. The serious science is now about mitigating the effects that are known and proven.

Also the IPCC reports are based on decades of scientific research. Whoever is telling you otherwise is spending a lot of money persuading you to do nothing because it could , not even would, reduce their profits.

 

[ClichéGuevara]

It's interesting how defensive people get, and demanding of proof, whilst offering none of their own and making claims that the actual scientific data doesn't always support.

It's also interesting how people assume a position for those of us that don't simply follow what is a media, rather than a scientific view.