I came here because, as an existing member of AV Forums, I got an email inviting me.

The intention of this forum was made clear by the site owner, and I quote it here yet again.
Welcome to the AV Forums climate change forum.
Why is this forum here? Well as the owner of this forum, it's a small something I can do to promote discussion and hopefully raise awareness of the problems and the solutions of global warming.
Having a couple of kids, their well being is now the most important thing in my life, and so whether I like it or not, global warming has replaced global nuclear war as the big thing to worry about. And I do worry about it.

AV Forums thankfully has excellent reach into Google, so people searching for discussions on the subject may find us here.

No AV system exists without electricity. What can we do to enjoy our electronic home entertainment AND save the planet?

----------------
A note to people who do not believe that global warming is a result of man's influence, this forum is *not* for you. Arguments as to whether global warming exists or not; or that it exists as a result of man's influence or not are mute.

What did I find? Hardly anything relating to the above.

A few GW "sceptics" clearly see this as another soapbox from which to give us their opinions and links to the many GW "sceptic" sites on the internet. They show no ability to make any sceptical judgements or to use critical thinking; they already "know" the truth and ignore anything that doesn't support that. They often give us the benefit of their right-wing opinions (notice that GW "sceptics" are nearly always right-wing?).

They feel the need to derail nearly every thread with their "sceptical" interjections and get upset when they are challenged. They have the appalling arrogance to think that no one should be allowed to question their views and they have the hilarious delusion that anyone not on their "side" is part of some lefty conspiracy. They frequently lie about what other members (and indeed other people in the "real world") have said and refuse to admit it or apologise when confronted.

How can we possibly discuss anything in keeping with the intention of this forum if these "sceptics" continue to do the above with virtual impunity? What is the point of deleting a few posts here and there when the root of the problem is not addressed?

Originally Posted by nikyzf

What is the point of deleting a few posts here and there when the root of the problem is not addressed?

The problem as documented by many is the constant abuse giving out by 2 or 3 individuals just because people question their crazy beliefs.

If skeptics were not allowed to post in this part of the forum it would just consist of 3 or 4 people saying the same old tired things over and over again, you would have no one to abuse so it would become redundant pretty fast.

What certain individuals need to do is stop rubbishing every single post by skeptics, that would solve so many problems.

[Jonstone]

I think one of the main problems for this forum is that it is situated inside an avforum.

If we are honest a lot of the equipment discussed, used, bought and sold on these forums is not environmentally friendly.

Plasma and lcd tv's both use significantly more energy than crt televisions, especially as they are getting larger and larger. Then there is the issue of disposing of all the obsolete equipment as well which is also problematical.

A lot of the portable equipment used by members of this forum contain batteries that are very unfriendly to the environment, energy usage of the top end pc's and consoles is also considerably higher these days.

So at best the majority of people reading these forums are higher than average energy users, so the best use of this forum would be to accept that and try to show people how they can try to offset their hobby by saving energy in other areas as any serious attempt to get people to lower their energy usage would also include telling them to ditch their plasmas and projectors and high spec pc's etc which is always going to go down badly on an av forum.

Just my opinion

[njp]

Originally Posted by Manhattan Mike

The problem as documented by many is the constant abuse giving out by 2 or 3 individuals just because people question their crazy beliefs.

The problem is that people with crazy beliefs (and for the avoidance of doubt, that's you) keep posting drivel in direct contradiction to the stated intention of the forum:

A note to people who do not believe that global warming is a result of man's influence, this forum is *not* for you. Arguments as to whether global warming exists or not; or that it exists as a result of man's influence or not are mute.

The last time there was a major bust-up here, which led to the "departure" of certain individuals, the change of name of the forum, and the statement I've just quoted being written, I actually posted defending the right of sceptics to post their counter arguments.

My main objection at that time was to one individual who was behaving in an almost identical fashion to the way you are behaving now. Like you, he had nothing to contribute apart from his invincible disbelief, which he repeated ad nauseum. I don't think that's a sceptical position. I think that's a position borne of complete ignorance of the natural world, and I don't see why we should have to put up with it.

Originally Posted by Jonstone

I think one of the main problems for this forum is that it is situated inside an avforum.

If we are honest a lot of the equipment discussed, used, bought and sold on these forums is not environmentally friendly.

Plasma and lcd tv's both use significantly more energy than crt televisions, especially as they are getting larger and larger. Then there is the issue of disposing of all the obsolete equipment as well which is also problematical.

A lot of the portable equipment used by members of this forum contain batteries that are very unfriendly to the environment, energy usage of the top end pc's and consoles is also considerably higher these days.

So at best the majority of people reading these forums are higher than average energy users, so the best use of this forum would be to accept that and try to show people how they can try to offset their hobby by saving energy in other areas as any serious attempt to get people to lower their energy usage would also include telling them to ditch their plasmas and projectors and high spec pc's etc which is always going to go down badly on an av forum.

Just my opinion

Thanks. That is indeed the issue. We enjoy something that is intrinsically wasteful. Even if we powered our screens and amps with solar power, windmills, or lots of pedalling (!), the manufacture and distribution of the equipment and source material is still energy-intensive.

Do you have any specific ways of saving energy yourself? IMO the ones most likely to be adopted are ones that save us money and/or make us fitter.

Originally Posted by njp

The problem is that people with crazy beliefs (and for the avoidance of doubt, that's you) keep posting drivel in direct contradiction to the stated intention of the forum:

There are far more people then just me who disbelieve it, you should know them, you basically rubbish everything they say.

Originally Posted by njp

I think that's a position borne of complete ignorance of the natural world, and I don't see why we should have to put up with it.

A differing of opinion does not make you ignorant. I have always stated even from my first posts that I am looking for evidence, as of yet none of this evidence has come to light. If it does then I am willing to review the situation.

All this forum has presented to me is people who are totally obessesd with something to such an extent they will abuse anyone who even dares to claim they are wrong. A good example of this is your triping blearyeyes posts.

Thankfully your views are limited to a very, very small minority on forums and does not exist anywhere else either in this country or the USA.

I have yet to find anyone in this country who is even remotly interested in the subject.

[njp]

Originally Posted by Manhattan Mike

A differing of opinion does not make you ignorant.

It does when that "difference of opinion" involves something as basic as denying the existence of seasons in the Arctic circle.

[andykn]

Originally Posted by Manhattan Mike

What certain individuals need to do is stop rubbishing every single post by skeptics, that would solve so many problems.

But they are rubbish. And contradictory - they effectively rubbish each other; some skeptics say it isn't happening, others say it is but is normal and not caused by man, others admit that it is abnormal but say its not caused by man.

What I can't understand is why people with little or no understanding of the science behind the consensus think they know better. When has there ever been such a consensus of modern scientific opinion that has been wrong?

Y2K bug? Nope, warnings were heeded, work done and it only affected a few systems that were not patched properly.

BSE? Nope, scientific consensus was only that it could transfer to humans, which it did, only 'news workers' built up the scare.

Bird Flu? Nope, see BSE.

Anyone who thinks they know better than the scientific consensus should have a better argument than 'I don't believe it' - cos that's just rubbish.

Originally Posted by andykn

But they are rubbish. And contradictory - they effectively rubbish each other; some skeptics say it isn't happening, others say it is but is normal and not caused by man, others admit that it is abnormal but say its not caused by man.

What I can't understand is why people with little or no understanding of the science behind the consensus think they know better. When has there ever been such a consensus of modern scientific opinion that has been wrong?

Exactly, and I've asked elsewhere why this should be. Is it purely down to the effectiveness of the "AGW denialist industry" (which BTW features some figures prominent in the tobacco/lung cancer "denialist" campaign a while ago)?

Y2K bug? Nope, warnings were heeded, work done and it only affected a few systems that were not patched properly.

Yup. I was involved in this. It had a benefit too: we had to do a code audit of course and as a result got rid of a fair bit of dead wood.

BSE? Nope, scientific consensus was only that it could transfer to humans, which it did, only 'news workers' built up the scare.

Bird Flu? Nope, see BSE.

Quite. The key is that media stories are not about the science, they are about what sells.

Anyone who thinks they know better than the scientific consensus should have a better argument than 'I don't believe it' - cos that's just rubbish.

So what can we do? Just ignore them?

Originally Posted by njp

It does when that "difference of opinion" involves something as basic as denying the existence of seasons in the Arctic circle.

Once again a fabricated comment , njp I have decided that your one track mind is just too much for me to handle anymore and have decided for the good of my own sanity not to reply to your posts anymore.

Thankfully your views are limited to a forum, the view is a bit more to my liking and understanding on the street.

You carry on worrying, I will carry on living, which unless I am mistaken is why we are all here on this planet, but I am sure you will find something to disagree with me on that as well.

God bless (and thank god for) america

[Stephen Wilde]

Can't get others to agree despite our best efforts ?

Can't possibly have a broad ranging discussion and agree to disagree leaving food for thought on both sides.

Must trash everything they say and failing that keep them from playing in 'our' playground. Boo Hoo !

Originally Posted by Stephen Wilde

Must trash everything they say and failing that keep them from playing in 'our' playground. Boo Hoo !

And I think thats the real problem, these GW guys see this forum as their backyard and us skepticts who dare to step foot in it are quickly ganged up on and abused, rubbished or our words twisted.

Its a shame but I suppose its the world that they live in. There sure must be a lot of uncertainty in the GW camp if they need to do what they do.

[njp]

Originally Posted by Manhattan Mike

Once again a fabricated comment , njp I have decided that your one track mind is just too much for me to handle anymore and have decided for the good of my own sanity not to reply to your posts anymore.

That's fine by me.

Of course, others can judge how sensible your views are on global warming, seasons and Arctic sea ice by reading this thread.

God bless (and thank god for) america

Somehow I just knew you'd be a God-botherer.

Originally Posted by njp

That's fine by me.

Well I have got some sense out of you at last, thanks for the memories

[johntheexpat]

Originally Posted by Manhattan Mike

I have yet to find anyone in this country who is even remotly interested in the subject.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/climateexperiment/

Only a quarter of a million people interested enough to take part. (Although that does include overseas people, they weren't all UK residents)

[blearyeyes]

Originally Posted by nikyzf

I came here because, as an existing member of AV Forums, I got an email inviting me.

The intention of this forum was made clear by the site owner, and I quote it here yet again.
Welcome to the AV Forums climate change forum.
Why is this forum here? Well as the owner of this forum, it's a small something I can do to promote discussion and hopefully raise awareness of the problems and the solutions of global warming.
Having a couple of kids, their well being is now the most important thing in my life, and so whether I like it or not, global warming has replaced global nuclear war as the big thing to worry about. And I do worry about it.

AV Forums thankfully has excellent reach into Google, so people searching for discussions on the subject may find us here.
No AV system exists without electricity. What can we do to enjoy our electronic home entertainment AND save the planet?

----------------
A note to people who do not believe that global warming is a result of man's influence, this forum is *not* for you. Arguments as to whether global warming exists or not; or that it exists as a result of man's influence or not are mute.

What did I find? Hardly anything relating to the above.

A few GW "sceptics" clearly see this as another soapbox from which to give us their opinions and links to the many GW "sceptic" sites on the internet. They show no ability to make any sceptical judgements or to use critical thinking; they already "know" the truth and ignore anything that doesn't support that. They often give us the benefit of their right-wing opinions (notice that GW "sceptics" are nearly always right-wing?).

They feel the need to derail nearly every thread with their "sceptical" interjections and get upset when they are challenged. They have the appalling arrogance to think that no one should be allowed to question their views and they have the hilarious delusion that anyone not on their "side" is part of some lefty conspiracy. They frequently lie about what other members (and indeed other people in the "real world") have said and refuse to admit it or apologise when confronted.

How can we possibly discuss anything in keeping with the intention of this forum if these "sceptics" continue to do the above with virtual impunity? What is the point of deleting a few posts here and there when the root of the problem is not addressed?

Well as you might expect, 'global warming' is a highly contentious issue and Stuart Wright may now be aware of the fact that there is not a consensus on the origins of this phenomenon.

But if we get right back on track and address the core question - "how to combat global warming" - then the facts speak for themselves. If we suspend reality for one moment and assume that this is the 'greatest problem the planet faces', then let's just look at the proposed means to 'tackle' this to date. If we were serious about emissions from power stations then we should phase out all coal/oil/gas stations and revert to nuclear. The greens won't contemplate this under any circumstances so the problem is clearly not the as great as they claim. Another half-baked 'solution' is to replace fossil-based fuels with biofuels. This would entail covering huge swathes of prime agricultural land under crops and probably cause the demise of much of the tropical rain forest, another greenie no no. What's left. Ban or tax, control and regulate. It's never worked before, not likely to work in future. With China and India showing no sign of slowing down, emissions can only increase. If these countries decide that their rate of growth is causing the demise of the planet, they will probably implement some form of emissions control. China responded voluntarily in the past with its one child policy to curb its population. If there is a real problem caused by CO2, left to their own devices, these two countries alone may come up with a workable solution. Until then, the future will probably be a grin and bear it.

Originally Posted by johntheexpat

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/climateexperiment/

Only a quarter of a million people interested enough to take part. (Although that does include overseas people, they weren't all UK residents)

I have not read it all but it appears to be something to get the general public to download stuff onto their own PC's and then process it, correct me if I am wrong here but what does this prove.

I suppose its a bit like the space ET search (SETTI), many people enjoyed doing something different but it did not take long before people realised they were looking for something that dont even exist (in this case aliens with big heads). We all love to do things like this as its a bit of fun.

[johntheexpat]

Originally Posted by Manhattan Mike

I have not read it all but....

but you are still prepared to dismiss it as irrelevant.
Too much trouble, presumably, to read it because if you did you may be forced into the conclusion that when you said

"Thankfully your views are limited to a very, very small minority on forums and does not exist anywhere else either in this country or the USA."

you were perhaps just a tiny bit off the mark?

Originally Posted by johntheexpat

but you are still prepared to dismiss it as irrelevant.

I never said that at all, I asked what does it prove, I never dismissed it.

People like doing science style experiments regardless of the subject matter. I used Setti as an example of doing something like this but people soon getting fed up with it.

I just cant get my head around how people would download stuff onto their own PC's to try to predict climate change. According to some here that's already been proven so why do we need the general public to do something that on all accounts has already been proved.

Thats the bit I cant understand and think of all that energy being wasted, not very environmentally friendly is it.

[njp]

Originally Posted by blearyeyes

Well as you might expect, 'global warming' is a highly contentious issue and Stuart Wright may now be aware of the fact that there is not a consensus on the origins of this phenomenon.

Not amongst the public, quite possibly. The scientific consensus is quite clear, however. And please note (again) that a consensus does not imply universal acceptance. There is no universal acceptance that evolution is true, or relativity, or quantum mechanics. Or even that the Earth revolves around the Sun.

[Artie Fufkin]

Originally Posted by Manhattan Mike

people realised they were looking for something that dont even exist (in this case aliens with big heads).

Denialist

[damo_in_sale]

Originally Posted by njp

Not amongst the public, quite possibly. The scientific consensus is quite clear, however. And please note (again) that a consensus does not imply universal acceptance. There is no universal acceptance that evolution is true, or relativity, or quantum mechanics. Or even that the Earth revolves around the Sun.

I really don't understand why we keep going around in circles about this. The basic assumption of this forum is that AGW is real. That's fine by me, because that means that we should be discussing personal efforts to mitigate CO2 output (little interest to me, I can discuss my reasons elsewhere) and government policy (what interests, and worries, me the most).

I am fed up with 'you're wrong', 'no, you're wrong', 'no, you're wrong and your stupid', 'no, you're wrong, you're stupid and you're evil', especially when it is regarding a specific point which is supposed to be moot on this forum.

[Stuart Wright]

Originally Posted by Jonstone

I think one of the main problems for this forum is that it is situated inside an avforum.

If we are honest a lot of the equipment discussed, used, bought and sold on these forums is not environmentally friendly.

Surely that is a very good reason to have this forum.

[Corey USA]

Even if the Global warming wasn't true many of the solutions to solve global warming, solves a lot of other problems we face mainly from population, deforestation, pollution, over consumption, urban sprawl, greed, abuses, unsustainable use of resources(which includes not being able to recycle those materials)

So even if global warming wasn't happening making and implementing plans to address above issues would make the world a more hospitable place to live.

The key here in this particular forum is not to go green but to become a "conservationist" in that we do everything in our power to minimize our use of resources and to protect what resources are left. Since this site seems to be geared toward those with money, wouldn't it be cool to own a refrigerator that uses 50-80%(this % is based against a non energy star rated unit the same size interior) less energy than the next best rated "energy star" unit?
Talk about brag rights! the unit runs for about 2700$. "Sun frost" is the company that makes it. this would allow you to make a big dent in your energy consumption!

Here is the link for said company http://www.sunfrost.com/

I wish I could buy one then the energy used to run my HDTV and PS3 would not register that much over the current unit in place now.

I offered a solution to cut consumption while using the greatest of today's tech. is this a green solution? NO it is a CONSERVATIONIST solution. it is Parallel to "green"

We are here in this sub forum to find a "balance" So we can still play yet minimize our footprint to share resources rather than stealing resources as we are doing now.

What I don't understand is why some find this last statement so offensive.....
here in this forum.....

Are we dealing with Bruising Sensitive EGOS? Severe ignorance? or worse "Someone who chooses to ignore whats happening around them and living a fantasy?"

I really wish they had a : peace: smiley here like they have in a sustainability forum I hang out in.

[Corey USA]

Look who showed up! Hiya Stuart! he speaks........

[Corey USA]

Originally Posted by Manhattan Mike

I never said that at all, I asked what does it prove, I never dismissed it.

People like doing science style experiments regardless of the subject matter. I used Setti as an example of doing something like this but people soon getting fed up with it.

I just cant get my head around how people would download stuff onto their own PC's to try to predict climate change. According to some here that's already been proven so why do we need the general public to do something that on all accounts has already been proved.

Thats the bit I cant understand and think of all that energy being wasted, not very environmentally friendly is it.

The reason for the general public to conduct a sized down version of the ones the scientist use is so that people can see with their own eyes what it is that is scaring the socks of the scientists. to understand why it is so serious and see with their own eyes why we need action to change our course to try to limit the severity of the change that is coming.

The people that participated wanted to understand.

They wanted to know how it works.

They wanted to know why there was a consensus of agreement.

They kept an open mind till they got their results back and made up their minds after running the experiment.

[damo_in_sale]

Originally Posted by Corey USA

Even if the Global warming wasn't true many of the solutions to solve global warming, solves a lot of other problems we face mainly from population, deforestation, pollution, over consumption, urban sprawl, greed, abuses, unsustainable use of resources(which includes not being able to recycle those materials)

But the ‘solutions’ cause other problems too. It might be that those consequences are not of concern to you, but they may be to others.

Originally Posted by Corey USA

So even if global warming wasn't happening making and implementing plans to address above issues would make the world a more hospitable place to live.

Would it though? It might go some way to addressing AGW concerns, but I am yet to read you’re comments about any negative consequences of the kind of policies you wish enacted. Are there none?


Cheers mate,

Damo

[Corey USA]

Sure their are consequences as an example the Biofuel industry using palm oil which is causing the deforestation of the rain forests to make room for a mono crop that is nutrient intensive is causing the desertification of the land where the rainforest was once.

The key to this example is that biofuel in general is a good thing it is how we implement the use of biofuels in that "where does it come from" Diversifying the source so as to prevent "mono" Realizing when a form of energy has been maxed and saying no more people will use that form. Example of a sustainable fuel gone haywire when demand exceeded sustainable levels is the wood pellet heating units. Instead of doing the responsible thing and limiting the number using the units to the level of output based on the level of the "Waste Pellets" output. The Irresponsible thing: The industry started growing cash crop to take place of wood pellets thus creating conflict with food production which has lead to higher food prices. So now the industry is no longer sustainable. OVERCONSUMPTION.

analogy:
What I promote is this: the parents are telling the children that they had enough cookies for one day. or else the children will get sick.

[dan54]

Wouldnt the simplest and easiest answer be to have a "I couldnt care less about so called GW forum"?

[njp]

Originally Posted by dan54

Wouldnt the simplest and easiest answer be to have a "I couldnt care less about so called GW forum"?

A forum in which only very stupid people are allowed to post? That sounds like an excellent idea, although it should probably be hosted on a different server.