Jump to content
Snow?
Local
Radar
Cold?
IGNORED

Is it possible to discuss Climate Change?


Paul

Recommended Posts

Posted
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada
  • Location: Rossland BC Canada

I have to remind myself (and you) that I come into this debate with a rather different mind-set than many UK weather watchers because of the different past experiences with winter weather. Over there, it must be making a profound impression on many of you that winter has failed to deliver what used to be fairly routine as recently as the period from the start of the war to 1987. I can see that if I were in your position, this would be a big impact on my thinking. Of course, I have spent that same period experiencing the continuation of winters as variable and sometimes as cold and snowy as ever before (at least from a slight distance now that I moved away from all that nonsense).

So when I joined UK weather forums because of my own research interests (and really not because I am that worked up about AGW or climate change) I just ran into a much different mindset where people were saying something big had already taken place, whereas here we are rather waiting for that something big to start happening (and I have a distinct memory from around 1988 of being told that it would start happening, ski resorts were all going to close, New York City would never see snow in the winters again, after one or two very mild winters while you were having those very cold winters in Europe). This rather placed me into the skeptical camp just because I had recently (going back to that stage) processed the flip-flop from the 1970s "ice age around the corner" school of thought in our discipline to the new mantra of global warming. And of course this has now morphed into climate change.

One is therefore very wary of the next big thing, and when many began to talk about the North Atlantic shutdown, the quiet Sun cold wave and other next big things, I also expressed some skepticism because my own research points to a more complex future evolution that includes a little bit of everything, and it is just quite natural for such a perspective to be the last thing sought out by the media or the public, or even the scientific community, because a forecast of "about the same only a bit different" just frankly isn't very "sexy" and who's going to pay for that? However, this is what I think is always the most likely outcome because for some reason this discipline seems to attract large numbers of anxious people who think a natural apocalypse is around the corner and that things are always getting "worse" ... perhaps this is human nature in general. Surely by random chance things must be getting "better" half the time yet I don't remember living through any of these intervals.

Anyway, it remains difficult to see what constitutes actual proof of climate change. For example, the IPCC seems to be almost certain that the Arctic Ocean will become ice-free at least on a regular seasonal basis by 2020 or 2030. However, what if some natural variation could produce that same effect? Then we won't know that this outcome is a "proof" of the AGW theory behind the climate change hypothesis, because one thing is certain, the climate will change to something different from now, so nobody is going to debate that idea. Another difficulty is to assess what is really catastrophic change and what is just change. And I find that the media perhaps more than the scientists do a very poor job in separating out different causes for certain effects. Everyone knows there is a growing water shortage in the western U.S., but how much of this is due to "climate change" and how much to increased population and agricultural use of water? How much rainfall could we realistically expect there to be even if the human race was not present on the earth? These sorts of issues get involved in the political debate, and obviously this is no small matter because now we have an American presidential election being fought on a choice between incremental change and sweeping change. The people there have massive stakes in that decision, because if they get it wrong in either direction, they and the whole world will be impacted negatively. In Canada, we have an even sharper choice to make fairly soon, because our minority Conservatve government is pretty widely understood to be gradualist at best on these issues, whereas the challenging Liberals have recently dressed themselves (literally) in green and are talking about very substantial tax changes designed to make large changes in greenhouse gas emissions (some say by wrecking the economy).

It is this sort of political backdrop to this scientific debate that charges it up, if it were just a scientific question I think it would be a rather sleepy one because all we are saying is give co2 a chance, and in 20-30 years we'll know what it is capable of doing to our atmosphere. I would have to say that many are probably wary of the notion that it will lead to a runaway greenhouse warming effect, just from the uncertainties involved in feedback processes, cloud cover, the possible fixed nature of the circulation from external forcing, and a host of other variables that may just say to co2 and its nasty friends, look, this is a symphony orchestra and we don't let the alto sax play a continuous solo here.

Well, I should rest now. If the Arctic Ocean goes ice-free again this late summer and autumn, and we have another freakish rebound effect somewhere in the northern hemisphere, then I sense that this debate is going to start turning towards "when can we here in England get some of this rebound, please?" and I need to be well-rested for that one. :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Rochester, Kent
  • Location: Rochester, Kent

In answering the original topic question: frankly - it's on a par with evangelism. And both sides, for that matter, too. It isn't lay science, so there's room for a row. Just like the existence of God. If there were a framework (like some sort of chairperson) I'd think we'd get somewhere. A free for all, will always get us no-where. I think that would require ultra-moderation, and is neither convenient, expeditious, nor practical.

Don't believe me? Start a thread for the existence of God with the same rules as the environment section and see what happens ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Dorset
  • Location: Dorset

I've deliberately held off posting in here to give it some thought.

Like most people on here I've been around the various forums discussing AGW, climate change etc for quite a few years now.

The ones that work and the ones that tend to fail are the ones where people tend to post for the sake of it.

To explain in more detail, whether your anti or for the AGW theory it does no good posting up every blog or newspaper article that supports your view.

If you stick to things which are by and large new which don't rely on a large dose of personal opinion and which are not designed to wind people up using words like AGW religion etc then things tend to go more smoothly. Things does go to both sides there are some comments made by the environmental groups blaming specific floods etc on AGW which are alarmist and wrong. If this can be backed up by a new study then fine discuss it, but the answer it probably not.

As to whether NW has a climate section that's upto NW, it's your call.

It brings a wider range of people and some good debate and I think adds a roundedness to the weather site, but it's NW decision. Have the forum, decide on the style, the level of moderation and the do's and don't and then stick to it.

I agree with CB's comment on discussing the science and alot of the other comments made as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Lincolnshire coast
  • Location: Lincolnshire coast

One aspect of the 'debate' is that maybe we are not trying to get someone to change their mind - that's a lost cause - but rather, we're trying to influennce the unseen audience who has not yet made up it's mind.

Thus:

A> Pig's fly.

B> Rubbish.

A> Pig's fly.

B> You pigflyist, you.

A> Pig's fly, see http/blahblah.ed

B> Pig's don't fly, that isn't a peer reviewed journal.

A> Pig's fly according to observations by Prof Avianpig phd.

A> Prof Avianpig phd bought his phd on the net and believes in alian abduction.

The idea is that the audience gets the message that the pig flyist camp is peopled by pretend scientists who are evil nutters intent on destroying the planet and poor misguided souls who have been led astray.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Sheffield South Yorkshire 160M Powering the Sheffield Shield
  • Weather Preferences: Any Extreme
  • Location: Sheffield South Yorkshire 160M Powering the Sheffield Shield

It's a very complex and interesting debate. You've got to keep an open mind to it all and weigh up both sides of the argument. Unless you're qualified on the subject you may also have accept that your view points are wrong or you've just misunderstood the article. There does seem a large amount of entrenchment and trench warfare on the subject though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Colchester, Essex, UK (33m ASL)
  • Location: Colchester, Essex, UK (33m ASL)

Maybe a few posts by the mods and admin here, on their thoughts on this area too?

Biff, posted on the 21st.

Paul, I don't think you should worry overmuch. You post a sticky 'Here be Dragons' warning at the top and then take a very light touch, allowing us to use all the sophisticated arguement and manners found in a pub on a Friday night. Those who don't like it, or more likely are bored with it, can go elsewhere so their complaints should not be taken too seriously.

There will always be lurkers who don't contribute, and importantly, lurkers who really don't know much about the issues yet. For their benefit it is important that rubbish is countered and contradicted. That isn't about changing people's minds (some are a lost cause) but guiding opinions for those who have none. There is a place for moderation - I knew of one US based climate site that was ruined by a handful of people who flooded the board with nonsense when the mods stayed asleep. But that hasn't happened here and although we have a few posters here who persistently post rubbish, at least it is quite challenging rubbish that makes one think about how it is to be countered, that process honing the arguements in a useful way.

Biff, I would rather this area was not like a pub on a Friday night actually. Even your post above on this thread is provocative in saying some people are a “lost cause” just because they have a different view to yours and labelling their view as “rubbish”. Perhaps if that is the style of “debate” you wish to participate in, whereby it can descend into a pub style brawl where childish insults and name calling is allowed and the winner is the one who can intimidate the most or has the best in the art of that behaviour, than maybe it is you that needs to look elsewhere for your venue to debate as I very much doubt Paul and the team will ever allow that style of debate here on NetWeather. It would not look good on the forum, would not be professional, would stifle healthy exploration of the subject of Climate Change and it would not look good to clients and associates who visit.

There is a set of rules which many do seem to flout, I have posted them here, and they are rules which we all agree to by being a member on NetWeather. They are part of the Terms and Conditions we all agree to by being here and remember, we are all here at the invite of Paul and the team, and even if we are members, we are still also guests, and should display respect and good will to them in our behaviour here.

1. Users must stay on topic within discussions - some natural drift is expected but wildly off topic posts due to users 'arguing' over petty points will not be tolerated.

2. Users must accept and understand that even when another member has a totally different point of view, they are entitled to that view and to discuss it without fear of being 'shouted down' or belittled.

3. Being closed minded and entrenched within a viewpoint makes it impossible for anyone to discuss a topic, therefore users must display a degree of open mindedness and acceptance that other viewpoints can and do exist in order to take part in discussions.

4. Users need to display common sense and an ability to let a discussion go before it becomes circular and degenerates into name calling and point scoring.

5. Showing other users respect is essential, any disparaging personal remarks will not be tolerated.

6. Complaints about posts, or comments within posts must be made via pm, email or the complain button to the team. Any complaints about a post or another member within a thread are not acceptable.

7. The team's decision on these matters are final, they will show you respect and explain their decisions to you, please ensure you show respect to them.

8. Any user either permanently or temporarily stopped from using the environment area who is found to have attempted to re-register in order to post, will be banned from the entire forum.

I personally sit more and more on the fence the longer this goes on, I see cracks in the arguements in what comes from science, and I dont see enough proof from the counter arguements which go against the grain of science. Therefore that tells me that we do not understand all this yet, that there is more to discover, and that wont happen by being closed minded. Which one of us here is going to have that eureka moment? Wont happen if we just catch the bus of science and not be able to explore indepth subjects within Climate Change, nor will it happen if we are not able to debate and discard theories which are obviously not true in an adult way, and neither will it happen if folks who do have ideas and thoughts on the subject fear being shouted down, ridiculed or have any other silly childish behaviour thrown at them.

Now, do we all agree to these terms or not? Are we willing to be adult in our behaviour, show respect to the forum team, and hold a sensible, varied and open minded exploration of Climate Change?

Edited by SnowBear
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Redhill, Surrey
  • Weather Preferences: Southerly tracking LPs, heavy snow. Also 25c and calm
  • Location: Redhill, Surrey

Paul

Just by reading this thread I have come to my conclusion quickly....shut it down. Even this thread cannot stop the jibes and digs from certain camps.

I don't think it is of any consequence if we change a persons mind or not, in my 'street life experience' folk will do what they do. I think C Bob has a very valid point, posting almost totally anonymous on a web site will ON HOTBED TOPICS create a climate where things get said below the belt and of utter irrelevance as there is likely to be no tangible come back. Generally an atmosphere where schoolboy bullies thrive.....and I detest bullying.

BFTP

Edited by BLAST FROM THE PAST
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Colchester, Essex, UK (33m ASL)
  • Location: Colchester, Essex, UK (33m ASL)
Paul

Just by reading this thread I have come to my conclusion quickly....shut it down. Even this thread cannot stop the jibes and digs from certain camps.

I don't think it is of any consequence if we change a persons mind or not, in my 'street life experience' folk will do what they do. I think C Bob has a very valid point, posting almost totally anonymous on a web site will ON HOTBED TOPICS create a climate where things get said below the belt and of utter irrelevance as there is likely to be no tangible come back. Generally an atmosphere where schoolboy bullies thrive.....and I detest bullying.

BFTP

Not too sure on closing down completely, we must have some area for this, its probably the most important subject there is within the realms of weather and climate. I think more along the lines of strict rules, from which there is no lee way, or perhaps put the threads on moderation, all has to be checked before hand, by mods who are dedicated to this area alone.

I certainly agree with your comments on bullyboy tactics, I too detest bullying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Aviemore
  • Location: Aviemore
Paul

Just by reading this thread I have come to my conclusion quickly....shut it down. Even this thread cannot stop the jibes and digs from certain camps.

I don't think it is of any consequence if we change a persons mind or not, in my 'street life experience' folk will do what they do. I think C Bob has a very valid point, posting almost totally anonymous on a web site will ON HOTBED TOPICS create a climate where things get said below the belt and of utter irrelevance as there is likely to be no tangible come back. Generally an atmosphere where schoolboy bullies thrive.....and I detest bullying.

BFTP

I find this type of comment quite sad really, yes there have been a few pointless comments made in this thread which imo are worthy of nothing more than being ignored, but aside from that there have been many, many reasonable, well thought out and positive comments. Why choose to only concentrate on the negative?

To re-iterate again, there is no possibility of this part of the forum being closed down. We will continue to have it, we will continue to try and weed out the 'trouble makers' and stop them from using it, what I'm trying to find is a reasonable starting place for us to create good, non circular and informative debate and this thread is helping to do that imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Lincoln, Lincolnshire
  • Weather Preferences: Sunshine, convective precipitation, snow, thunderstorms, "episodic" months.
  • Location: Lincoln, Lincolnshire

The main problem with climate change is that it's such a massive issue which is likely to have huge bearing on how we continue as a civilisation over the next two centuries- so at various points decisions will have to be made- decisions that will force certain opinions on everyone. I say this in view of the fact that even if the AGW aspect is being overestimated by mainstream scientists, we have issues like peak oil to consider. So I can see why many feel a need to be forceful about their views.

The main problem on these threads is when we get into a point-scoring match rather than objective discussion of the subject. In particular, the popular practice of having a pre-conceived viewpoint and finding "evidence" that fits it, rather than fitting one's POV around the available evidence. That rarely contributes well to a discussion. On the anti-AGW side I often sense a desire to support maintenance of the status quo- avoiding need to make lifestyle modifications, avoiding making any reforms to the current free market system etc. On the pro-AGW side we often have outright dismissal of any scepticism- including valid points as well as unsubstantiated nonsense.

Although I won't mention names, there are half-dozen or so names that crop up as being particularly frequent trouble sources.

As for Paul's mentions of the IPCC, I've been involved with a number of contributors to the IPCC itself recently, as a research student at UEA. The IPCC does have some political motivations, and isn't completely free of bias, and I don't think the peer-review system is perfect either. However, it does try to be as balanced as possible- which is more than can be said for most climate organisations- and it does base its conclusions on science rather than politics. In particular, it's hard to argue with the IPCC's statements with regards the uncertainty, their latest report states that anthropogenic influences could contribute a 21st century warming ranging from 1.1C (which would probably be quite harmless) to a potentially catastrophic 6.4C. Some of those on the sceptic side, I feel, tend to misquote the IPCC as being far more pro-AGW than they really are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Castle Howard, North Yorkshire
  • Location: Castle Howard, North Yorkshire

Yes I agree with that Paul

I think to close it down would be rather unfair to, not only those who participate, but also to

members who enjoy reading this particular area too, and perhaps aren't actively involved

in the discussions.

I feel that the forum administrators have their hands tied to be honest, and there is very little

that can be done, or changes made that haven't already been discussed or tried in the past.

I believe any changes that are made have to come from those who contribute to the discussion.

I would ask, if it is possible to have less trouble free debate in other areas of the site,

then why isn't it possible in this area also?

All that is needed in my opinion is for people to have a little think about how others

might react to their post, before pressing that send button.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Western Isle of Wight
  • Weather Preferences: Snow, Storm, anything loud and dramatic.
  • Location: Western Isle of Wight

Hi GMG :)

In my opinion Netweather is a forum mature enough to handle AGW discussion.

The winter snow threads are the best in the business, yet they can kick off in seconds :D Handle those and anything else palls in comparison :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Cheddar Valley, 20mtrs asl
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and lots of it or warm and sunny, no mediocre dross
  • Location: Cheddar Valley, 20mtrs asl

Firstly, I’m glad there are no plans to close this part of the forum.

Is it possible to discuss climate change? It should be.

I think the problem of the circular arguments is twofold; firstly it is possible to find articles or papers on almost any given subject within climate change, from reputable sources, which will give opposing views and counter arguments. If the scientists cannot agree, what hope is there that we will? There seem to be very little black/white points which can as yet be clarified with absolute certainty.

Secondly, I think quite a lot of the circular movement comes when points previously covered are re-visited by new members beginning their own research/discussions. The long standing members understandably get frustrated by what they perceive as “old ground” and are perhaps less tolerant than they should be. It seems new visitors are welcomed into the fold initially whilst their views are explored, once it becomes clear where they stand in the discussion, they are then assigned a “camp” into which they are placed and any subsequent posts are viewed and responded to accordingly. There have been many comments about entrenched views and lack of open mindedness, but if a post is met with “oh you’re in that camp” response then I cannot see much room for open mindedness.

IMO I think the fundamental problem in this area of the forum is that there seems to be the need to assign labels of pro AGW/anti AGW, believers versus sceptics; automatically this sets up a combative, competitive atmosphere, the need to convert one to the other in order to have the most members on “your” team.

I don’t have any ideas as to how to combat this or moderate it. At the end of the day it comes down to each and every one of us to moderate our own behaviour, we are after all, all grown ups. Perhaps if people lost the desire to “convert” others, remembered that at the end of the day there are no certainties in any of this area of science and that their views are precisely that, views and opinions; neither better nor lesser than anyone else’s, just different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Castle Howard, North Yorkshire
  • Location: Castle Howard, North Yorkshire
Hi GMG :)

In my opinion Netweather is a forum mature enough to handle AGW discussion.

The winter snow threads are the best in the business, yet they can kick off in seconds :D Handle those and anything else palls in comparison :D

Russ mate, I think the MOD thread is a different kettle of fish, because during the winter time

it becomes very busy, and the discussion moves along at a fast pace.

Believe me, the Netweather team members look for ways that they can improve the forum

every day. One of the main reasons Netweather is the successful site it is, is because

it strives to make everyone feel welcome regardless of their knowledge. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Mytholmroyd, West Yorks.......
  • Weather Preferences: Hot & Sunny, Cold & Snowy
  • Location: Mytholmroyd, West Yorks.......

One of the other more nauseating behaviours in this section appears to be 'bullying by proxy'. Either by openly calling for mod. intervention or by pm'ing Mods to complain when points are highlighted in a way that makes the origional postee upset.

The climate of restriction this engenders is in no way helpful in building 'open, free discussion/debate' and some posters I have had cause to speak with have confessed that they too become more engaged in self presevation (to save themselves from a sin bin or a ban) than in the debate itself.....a kind of self imposed ban.

We all wish to 'play fair' and , since my school days, I've never liked the 'kind' to whinge to teacher/boss/line manager when they aren't getting their own way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Colchester, Essex, UK (33m ASL)
  • Location: Colchester, Essex, UK (33m ASL)

GW, I haven't had the cause to use the report button, nor spoken to mods about anyone in the course of the debates, but, the report button is there for a reason, and we all have the right to use it when the need arises including you, its your choice not to use it, but that choice shouldn't be taken away from others just because we do not use it. It is not the same as running to teacher, it is bringing to attention matters to a mod which maybe against the Terms and Conditions of using the forum. The team has that function there to help them in their duties and I certainly wouldn't call it bully by proxy. Unfortunately with the way the discussions can get heated on this section it needs to be dealt with with a strict code of conduct otherwise it soon degenerates into what I would call a silly school ground slanging match which does not help the section at all and also will put off many who would otherwise probably post to the section.

I personally put this all down to having a little thought be posting, self restraint, and respect to others on their views, its not about climate or anything else really, just respect to others and Paul and the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Ashbourne,County Meath,about 6 miles northwest of dublin airport. 74m ASL
  • Weather Preferences: Cold weather - frost or snow
  • Location: Ashbourne,County Meath,about 6 miles northwest of dublin airport. 74m ASL

I dont go into this section much cos imo all people do is go round and round in circles amoung other things. If people cant have a mature debate on the subject i think its kind of ironic,cos no wonder the planet is in the state its in,the human race just isnt mature enough to look after this beautifull planet of ours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Cheddar Valley, 20mtrs asl
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and lots of it or warm and sunny, no mediocre dross
  • Location: Cheddar Valley, 20mtrs asl

The report button is there for a reason, some posts when full of personal comments do need reporting. It is the express wish of the Mods and Paul, that posts which offend, are reported, not retaliated to in thread. It's not bullying by proxy, more a quiet word in the ear when the line of impoliteness has been crossed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Mytholmroyd, West Yorks.......
  • Weather Preferences: Hot & Sunny, Cold & Snowy
  • Location: Mytholmroyd, West Yorks.......

The complaint button is just fine and it is not it's proper use that is being questioned but more the activities of a few 'bad eggs' who misuse it to further their own agenda's! <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Aviemore
  • Location: Aviemore

To be fair, this discussion isn't about the moderation of the threads or the report button. We seldom get spurious reports from people using this or any other part of the forum, but we do take each report on its own merits and act accordingly. If someone reports a post and we don't believe it to be a problem, we don't take action on that post, it's as simple as that.

I must say and without trying to be personal here, but when people start accusing others of 'telling tales' when than entitled (and are indeed encouraged) to use the report button to aid in the smooth running of the forum, it leaves a bad taste in the mouth.

Just because you don't think your (or anyone elses) post warrants being reported or could lead to someone being annoyed/offended by it, that doesn't mean their opinion and thoughts on it aren't relevant. Dare I say it, your post reminds me a little of the typical playground bully trying to ensure no-one exposes their behaviour - not nice...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: South Yorkshire
  • Location: South Yorkshire
We all wish to 'play fair' and , since my school days, I've never liked the 'kind' to whinge to teacher/boss/line manager when they aren't getting their own way.

I really didn't know that this sort of thing went on here?

Is it possible to discuss climate change? Well yes - just speak your mind and get ready for the inevitable flak. That of course is where the problem is,but if I for example said something that is ridiculous to say Biff,it's not reasonable for his response to be "sorry LG I disagree" and leave it at that.The science is so uncertain (not 'settled'!),that it's wide open to an individual's interpretation and indeed expectations. For instance,I could post a chart right now with statistics from ALL the major monitoring bodies which show absolutely no warming trend of the oceans for the last eleven years,and indeed show a pronounced cooling for the last two. I could also concurrently post info from a *very* trusted source that shows a decline in sea levels over the same period. It's the here and now,it's very black and white. I'm not going to bother though because I know full well that I'll be inundated with 'if's,buts and maybes',why am I trying to promote the continuing pumping of CO2 into the air etc? (I'm not).

I think I might be one of the 'trouble causers' which TWS alluded to earlier (apologies if I'm wrong,TWS),but I never set out to aggravate. Some things are said in jest but are often misconstrued. I'm guilty of the use of terms such as 'warmist',globo-warmer cult' etc,in much the way as terms such as 'deniers','flat-Earthers' etc are levelled at such as me. So let's eradicate such terminology right now. Snowbear's lengthy contribution earlier is a good reference point.

I think we'd all get along much better if we all had a nice comfy seat on top of the fence but alas that isn't so! Sometimes I wish I could go back many years and rethink the whole climate change thing with an open mind,but that ain't going to happen of course! This forum is fantastic fun,very thought provoking and worthwhile,otherwise we wouldn't bother coming here and getting so worked up/amused/exasperated etc. Like the fans of two opposing football teams having a heated debate on the outcome of a match,time will tell. I do sometimes wonder what the point of it is,though. I mean,if all the 'deniers' (slap!) were to be 'converted' by some means,so what? At the end of the day it matters not whether you accept or reject the AGW theory; our puppet masters -government-will do what they want under that banner. We are just the chattering masses! I'm aware of the lurkers on these forums who either don't feel strongly enough on the matter or lack confidence to post,being influenced by what they read here. It's been inferred that that deniers (slap,slap!) such as me are giving the wrong message entirely and are basically saying it's perfectly alright to carry on as normal. Now that does bother me because I have never,never,never implied that in thought or action. The whole arena of climate change,causes,implications,FF depletion (I see Gordon wants Saudi to invest £100,000,000,000 into UK sustainable energy projects-how telling),world politics,the motives of certain groups etc has become such a quagmire that it's impossible to make sense of.

With that I'm gonna take a break from posting for a little while,watch from the sidelines. I'm off to play chess at level ten on the computer,it's less taxing on the brain. Best wishes,everyone!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Aviemore
  • Location: Aviemore

This has been a real eye opener in some instances, and some people have had their right to post into this area removed as their attitude towards other peoples views have been revealed very clearly shown up within this thread.

I'm sure we can take things forward from here on in, we need to promote the understanding other peoples positions and views, even when not in agreement. We all also need to take a close note of the code of conduct:

http://www.netweather.tv/forum/index.php?act=SR&f=8

The moderating team will be enforcing it strictly, so all those taking part in this area need to make sure they stick within it.

This is an important discussion, and has the potential to have topics which are challenging, interesting and educational and it is everyone's interests that they are that way, so we can hopefully work together to ensure this happens...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Derby - 46m (151ft) ASL
  • Location: Derby - 46m (151ft) ASL

Havent read all the posts Paul, but simple answers is yes, but...

Dictating statements is where the discussions fall apart, purely as most (or at least some) have strong opinions on teh topic. If dictorial statements werent inputted into the discussion, i'm sure it would be more free flowing. Just my view of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Mytholmroyd, West Yorks.......
  • Weather Preferences: Hot & Sunny, Cold & Snowy
  • Location: Mytholmroyd, West Yorks.......

Since the post was deleted I will try again, with different wording, to post my intended observations.

You will never remove the individual from their postings and ,as such, there will be instances where an individuals damage/issues cloud their interpretations of posts and find offence where none was intended/intimated. Because of our removal from one another we readily imbue other posters with our own 'interpretations' of their personalities. The generalisations we hear of a person being a 'typical this/typical that' when neither has met and known that for sure clearly illustrates this.

The number of times I've been PM'd or pulled up on a thread about my 'style' of posting shows me how readily folk will push their own interpretations onto something to justify their own opinion of it.

None of this post is 'barbed', sarcastic ,aimed at any one person, but you can be sure that someone out their will feel it is 'in part' aimed at them.

Within any debate that should not be a a driver for complaint but will be so on occasion.

Within 'climate change' you have to find the 'box' that fits the climate change poster (in the way that folk who crave to be 'politicians' can appear to be a breed apart). This maybe means that many of the folk 'active ' in the area Climate and Science have a similar set of 'quirks' to their psyche as political beasties do (maybe they have more than their own share of sensitivities/issues/are more highly strung?) leading to the same 'flavour of debate continually emerging.

I strongly feel that the issue of 'discussing climate change' is not as black and white as some of the posts above would hint at, in fact I see it as a vast area of grey!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • UK Storm and Severe Convective Forecast

    UK Severe Convective & Storm Forecast - Issued 2024-03-28 09:16:06 Valid: 28/03/2024 0800 - 29/03/2024 0600 SEVERE THUNDERSTORM WATCH - THURS 28 MARCH 2024 Click here for the full forecast

    Nick F
    Nick F
    Latest weather updates from Netweather

    More rain on the way: Storm Nelson brings gales Thursday, but rain and wind easing for Easter

    Spells of rain or showers with sunshine in between affecting most areas today, snow over northern hills. Storm Nelson arrives tomorrow, bringing gales to southern coasts and windy elsewhere with further showers. Showers and wind easing somewhat into the Easter Weekend. Read the full update here

    Netweather forecasts
    Netweather forecasts
    Latest weather updates from Netweather

    UK Storm and Severe Convective Forecast

    UK Severe Convective & Storm Forecast - Issued 2024-03-27 09:35:27 Valid: 27/03/2024 0900 - 28/03/2024 0600 THUNDERSTORM WATCH - WEDS 27 MARCH 2024 Click here for the full forecast

    Nick F
    Nick F
    Latest weather updates from Netweather
×
×
  • Create New...