Corbyn on Climate Change and Poverty


Home Forums Discussion Forum Corbyn on Climate Change and Poverty

This topic contains 5 replies, has 1 voice, and was last updated by  Clark 3 days, 5 hours ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #48881 Reply

    Coldish

    “…when Corbyn was roundly jeered by a substantial section of the audience for stating that climate change impacted hardest on the poorest people in the poorest countries.”

    I didn’t watch the debate, but if that’s what Corbyn said I would have put it differently: what are likely to impact the poor harder than climate change are the futile measures adopted supposedly to ‘stop’ climate change. Even without human activities (which means without humans) the earth’s climates (and there are many) would continue to vary between wide limits, as they did before the advent of humans. Many human activities have had an influence on weather and climate, ever since we started clearing forests, planting crops and herding animals. Cities, roads and factories are all human artefacts and they all influence climate. Taking just one human activity, the addition of fossil-fuel-derived CO2 to the atmosphere, as the key to controlling climate is a futile endeavour, doomed to failure. What would really help the poorest people in the poorest countries is a drive to spread the benefits of industrialisation to those countries. I’m sure Corbyn knows this.

  • #48883 Reply

    Keith Alan

    The reason Corbyn was jeered for talking about climate change is that a lot of people have realised just what a massive elitist scam it really is. There is no man made climate change, just ask Corbyns brother who is a great deal more intelligent than him.

    • #48898 Reply

      Clark

      Coldish and Keith Alan, you really seem to have no conception of the scale of the potential disaster that Earth is facing.

      Please explain to readers how a “scam” makes the polar icecaps melt away?

      [video src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2a/Annual_Arctic_Sea_Ice_Minimum_1979-2015_with_Area_Graph.webm" /]

      Maybe this cartoon will put the matter in perspective for you; “climate has changed before, you know”:

      https://xkcd.com/1732/

      How bad could it get?

      – According to the scientific forum 4 Degrees Hotter: “Less than a billion people will survive.” Expect, on average, more than a million human global warming deaths every week. As such, mass graveyards stacked with bodies would become a new normal.

      – According to Professor Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, one of Europe’s most eminent climate scientists, director of the Potsdam Institute: “At 4C Earth’s … carrying capacity estimates are below 1 billion people.”

      – Echoing that opinion, professor Kevin Anderson of the prestigious Tyndall Centre for Climate Change stated: “Only about 10% of the planet’s population would survive at 4C.”

      – A global average of 4C means land temperatures would be 5.5C-6C hotter, especially inland from coasts. The tropics would be too hot for people to live and most of the temperate regions would be desertified.

      – As a result, half of the planet would be uninhabitable.

      Earth 4C Hotter

      https://phys.org/news/2018-08-earth-hothouse-state.html

      • #48899 Reply

        Clark

        I’ve tried reading Piers Corbyn’s site and it’s a mess. There are all sorts of claims, each superficially plausible, but they’re entirely disjointed with nothing remotely approaching an integrated theory of climate.

        Piers Corbyn’s site is basically an advertisement for his commercial activities, which is selling weather forecasts to a niche market; the few companies controlled by those who suspect some international science conspiracy. He has a tiny market share, most turn to the various national weather bureaux, but it’s enough to secure a hansom income from his one-man operation.

        Crucially, he refuses to disclose either his theories or his methods. Until he publishes in the scientific literature, where his claims can be subjected to scrutiny and challenge, including that of other experts in the field, he isn’t doing science. And I apply exactly the same criteria to pharmaceutical companies etc. Such hidden stuff is more occult than science, because that’s the meaning of the word “occult” – it just means “hidden”.

  • #48992 Reply

    nevermind

    I think we will be still teaching these ostriches in 20 years time Clark, when their heads are under water, stuck in a hole, backside exposed to all that comes.
    Not much fun to talk about two non debaters, or even put a link up for them, they’re gone to spout elsewhere after depositing their brouhaha here.

    • #49022 Reply

      Clark

      Hello Nevermind, good to see you.

      Extinction? NO, Rebellion!

Reply To: Corbyn on Climate Change and Poverty
Your information: