well the majority of scientits do believe in the "enhanced" greenhouse effect and i think that it is unfair to say that "scientists are all on the gravy train with politicians...
I really wish Thom Yorke would give up on this Global Warming agenda. Our planets temperature is forever changing, a hundred years ago the temperature was the same as today. I'm all for being environmental but when it comes to Global Warming I believe it's a farce. And by the way I'm not a right wing douchebag just check my favourites.
@23lFrench simply, the solar radiation is absorbed by the earth and the energy is reflected bak into space. When gases such as CO2 and CH4 are given off the solar energy gets absorbed by the gases trapping the heat. This is OK. The ENHANCED Greenhouse effect is when more gases are released due to human activity more heat gets absorbed and the earth gets warmer. Practically all scientists agree with this, (the ones who don't work for oil companies)...
@jordanbarker676 I give the Greenhouse Theory five years before it is completely dead. The globe has started to cooling abruptly as The Sun enters a new Grand Minimum. Cooling oceans will absorb co2. Glaciers have started to grow, Polar bears are thriving and the mountain in Africa still has a snow covered peak. There is no evidence that points to Co2 having a direct impact on climate change. Oil companies are all going along with the idea of global warming....
@jordanbarker676 ...for obvious reasons. Companies are much a lot of money out of this global warming and scientists are all on the gravy train with politicians. The scientists who are skeptics are the ones without any political influence. There are a lot of well respected scientists against the idea that we have a direct influence on climate change. piers Corbyn is an example.
@23lFrench well, it's an interesting subject, but the enhanced greenhouse effect is true and i doubt that it will be "dead"... it would be stupid, though, to reject any ideas... maybe i'm wrong but who knows?? :D
@jordanbarker676 It just annoys me when they say we are past the debate stage, I mean if they had undeniable evidence then okay but this is still very much worth debating and discussing. I am yet to find a debate on youtube with the climate change side of the argument actually having a scientist debating for them, it is always the other way round.
@jordanbarker676 Temperatures have been increasing since the end of the Little Ice Age in 1850. Long before we started producing carbon dioxide with power stations and cars. Temperatures increased during the Medieval Warm Period and Decreased during the Little Ice Age. Now temperatures are increasing again. Infact there has been warming and cooling occurring for 3500,000,000 years.
Those of us in th U.S. involved in grassroot movements smell the shit and we are sick and tired of politicians making all the decisions, and speaking for us. they are too bound by their parties and reelections. I will do what I can to take care of the earth and continually pester those in power to do something. Thom may not know all the facts but he is out there because he wants to make sure that this planet is still beautiful for his kids to live in! So do I Thom, so thanks for going to this.
90% reductions by 2050? of what? greenhouse gases? Right... That means we need to almost completely stop using fossil fuels in under 40 years, while increasing population at the same time?
90% reductions by 2050? of what? greenhouse gases? Right... That means we need to almost completely stop using fossil fuels in under 40 years, while increasing population at the same time?
I think the reason Mr Yorks wearing red trousers is because he's a fan of Jim Hendrix who wore the same trousers at the Monteray pop festival in 1967. And then Thom looks like Hendrix at Woodstock 1969 when he played Glastonbury 2010.
thom yorke doesnt have a clue what he's talking about with regards to the environment. yeah like maaaan you've seen that al gore film like yeeeah. its crazy this stuff man
He's got ants in his (red) pants. He's just a fidgety fella. The fact that he's physically showing up at these summits, even though he's a total fish outta water, is a powerful statement in and of itself. Besides, why is he being interviewed by a gameshow host? That's a bit off-putting.
@villiparis That's kind of dumb to say. This is far from anti-establishment, this is tryin to get the establishment to man the fuck up and do what's right even if they don't die rich.
fuk thats the second time the fukas blokked me,is tim for or against this climate bollocks.i hope hes not with the co2 camp.i really do with climate gate+31000 scientists trying to sue al gore +japanese scientists with proof its not c02+greenpeace how the..they get on roof of parliament to protest i cant get on roof of ..king local car park for security cameras.+media now talk of "climate change denial lioke its a ..kin disease.
Politians will never see the way most people think. We see the logical, they make it more difficult and fail to see the simpilicity of some problems sometimes.
I can see why he doesn't want to be around them too much lol.
There are major studies of CO2 going back to the mid 1900's! The small amount of CO2 in our atmosphere (284 ppm; pre-industrial 1832) insulates our planet by 50 degrees or more - basic heat-retentive physics! This is fundamental earth science, experimentally known and understood for decades!
THIS is a perfect example of my frustration with disinformation lobbies in the USA. You don't have to know anything about science at all to believe their nonsense.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Quit the intellectual snobbery. Anybody knows that if the co2 levels go up and the earths temp goes down or vice versar, consistantly over a period of time, then there is no grounds to say that co2 is significantly increasing earths temp
This is what happened when we had somemthing called the ice age!!! The rises in temp which pulled us out of the ice age were in fact more dramatic than the rises we are seeing today. (must have been turbo charged horse and carts obviously)
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
You also need to stop seeing Al Gore as seperate to this issue..he is the one who peddled this concept to the extreme.( doesn't that tell you something)
Please think outside the box here, think of the bigger picture and connect all the dots . You cannot seem to look past 'carbon cycles' which is just basic science and does anything to prove man made global warming anything. Im more interested in 'sun spots' as the data is irrefutable
Do I sound like Al gore? I haven't even seen his movie, but the parts I have seen have not impressed me. I'm just talking about the scientific consensus from my field, and attendant research with which I'm familiar...
This climate subject isn't recent to me. This has been going on in the earth sciences for decades. Don't associate it with "Al Gore" because that happens to be the first major mention you've heard of it... take interest in actual science instead of anti-science politics.
How is actually being educated in the field, and trying to explain it in some detail "snobbery" ...? I respond because I work in biology, studying the geographical distribution and climactic tolerance of species. I have been observing the creep in latitude for decades. It is palpable that the earth is warming. The patterns of plants and animals indicate it is so. The melting permafrost across northern latitudes indicates it.
And here I am, arguing with some armchair warrior on the internet...
Your 3rd point is ridiculous. They are talking about the loss of perennial ice. Perannial ice = ancient ice. Arctic ice always re-freezes in winter, to roughly the same -area- ... but "area" of ice is hardly the same as "volume" of ice. The volume of ice has decreased significantly and continues to do so. This is due to the loss of perennial ice. Soon, in summer, there will be no ice at the poles, when once there always was.
No I am not talking about perennial ice. The 24% of ice that has been regained in the last 2 years is measured against the 27% that had been lost in the last 30 years
Yes, but I don't care about this "One World Government" and I would be against such a thing myself -- but the scientific information says that warming is real. Information from across dozens of independent earth science fields. Including my own. these are observations I make every year. It is happening.
The "polar bear population" has little directly to do with the climate cycle. They are one (of many) species which can potentially be affected, but not necessarily. More important are the alleles of a species, and their adjustment to environmental change. People who say this clearly aren't educated in biology, as they presume that : "if warming were real, polar bears would be dying..." or something like that. Such logic is purely uninformed.
The earth has warmed significantly for more than the last 15 years. that is utter nonsense. Who says that?
Google: "arbor day climate maps" - you can literally see animations showing latitudinal "zone shift" across the USA, and other regions of the world. I myself am observing warmer climate species occurring more northward every year.... the fact of warming is a given, really.
As i already said, it has not "been cooling" for 9 years. If you looked at the graph, you'd see a wide series of highs and lows. What they've chosen is an incidental low, that happens to be lower than one occurring 9 years ago. So whoever is making that claim is exploiting the public's statistical illiteracy.
CO2 is quite heat-retentive, even in small amounts. You can do the experiment yourself.
We're familiar with patterns that cause ice ages. It's all rather well mapped thanks to ice core samples, layers, geological research and paleo/climate models. Paleo/climatologists don't just marvel at the expected oscillation of natural cycles. The entire basis of their science -is- the observation of these cycles in the past, and how they affect the present.
I've seen this video, and it' peripheral. Uninformative. I've seen many like it, and all are consistently illiterate in the basic science behind ecology, climatology, and even chemistry. But then again, I fear their claims do in fact rely on such omissions and an implicit ignorance in the audience.
Some of the comments I've read here just sickened me. Is this what one gets nowadays for getting off his ass, taking a stance for what he believes in, and trying to make a difference in the world? I don't know if global warming is man-maid or not. I do not know what to believe any more. But what I DO know is that Thom Yorke's dedication is admirable and commendable. And some of you snickering from behind computer screens are just fucking disgraceful. What have YOU done to help anything?
It is manmade. This is scientific consensus. The USA has been chrrning out disinformation, meant to confuse the public, make them fight and be indecisive.
Study the science - carbon cycles, feedback, extreme ice loss, and I promise it is all straightforward and logical, palpable and measured.
Ignore the media, political lobbyists and lackeys who shit on science, and try to make it seem tenuous or indecisive. This is not the legitimate state of things. Our effect has been known for decades.
Ow dear, Thom is one of the most amazing musicians ever BUT... I wish he'd STFU about 'man made' global warming. I am disappointed and angered that so many intelligent are dupped by this bullshit and their love and care of the planet has been used as a target to the secrets societies manipulation
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
No you should check YOUR facts and also check peoples comments properly. I didn't say "Global warming wasn't real". I said 'man made' global warming is false.
There is so much evidence to support the fact that the global warming which has occured is perfectly natural and has nothing to do with human co2 emissions.
In fact, the earth has actually been cooling down for the last 9 years. IT REALLY PAYS TO CHECK FACTS PEOPLE WAKE UP!!!
Carbon cycles (i.e. respiration / photosynthesis) on earth are basic high school science.
It's not just climatologists who say global warming is manmade. Physicists, organic chemists, biologists, and many other people who study carbon cycles / solar feedback patterns know this.
We are releasing a very substantial amount of carbon back into the atmosphere, carbon which took many hundreds of millions of years to accumulate, and has been locked away underground for eons.
Obviously not one of the 30,000+ scientists, including the worlds most qualified weather experts, that claim this is the biggest fruad that has been perpetrated on mankind then...
Shame on you!
Its makes me sick to my stomach that this is actually taught in schools
Id like to know where people are getting this denial junk - I'm aware of some funded disinformation lobbies centered in the USA. I had figured (perhaps wrongly) that people in the USA would be smarter than to be swayed by political pandering.
Given what I have seen in the field during the last 2 decades alone, I find it unbelievable that there is any "debate" (albeit among unspecialized armchair critics) about this subject. The whole ordeal smacks of science illiteracy & political mythology.
I would say "shame on you" for not having enough interest in the subject of science itself to realize the ecological scope of what is being said. If you think "climatologists" and "climate data" are the only sources of this observation, then I don;'t know what else to say. There's a tremendous ecological depth - spread throughout all earth sciences - which has been collecting data on global warming and it's effects for decades.
All I can say is ignore politics. Listen to -field- scientists.
Yes, but this is completely out-of-context lobbyist rhetoric, completely unscientific. This is certainly not what field scientists are looking at. If you ask one (and I presume you know at least one...) you will quickly find out how ridiculous these "claims" are. You don't have to know any actual science to believe this stuff. If you are at all interested in science, it becomes obvious there is an anti-science disinformation lobby in the USA. Much like there is with creationism.
All the facts that I have mentioned have come straight from the mouth of the worlds leading experts in that particular field.
The rest is me giving insight, for those who care about whether they live under tyranny or not, of the political and media manipulation. Behind every change that affcects are freedom there is always either a natural, exploited problem or a totally manufactured problem to justify the course of action
In this case, its a total manipulation of perception. NO pollution is not a good thing. YES we should use renewable energy. YES I am concerned about acid rain, but classing something like co2 as a 'toxin' when without it life would cease to exist is the biggest fraud mankind will ever see. Its something Starling would be very proud of
The fact remains all the REAL science has been firewalled off by the media.
"classing something like co2 as a 'toxin' when without it life would cease to exist is the biggest fraud mankind will ever see. Its something Starling would be very proud of" ---
The idea that CO2 is a toxin or bad for life on earth is a complete red herring. No honest scientist thinks this! As a biologist, I find the suggestion absurd! That is quite obviously a political move by disinformation lobbies. Nobody thinks that! Jeez, where do people get this stuff?
Well thats what co2 is going to be officially classed as, like it or not.
Although I keep science separate from politics, the two in this instance are both VERY related. The FAKE science which completely misses out the fact that earths temp is in perfect harmony with sun spot activity and that fact that weather stations round the world report there has been a decrease in earths temp in the last 9 years, is being used as the justification for the formation of a new world government
Climatology is decadal. If you arbitrarily link base temperature points in the 100 years, one can easily claim earth has "cooled for years" more than once. This is a statistically illiterate assertion. Obviously climate change is not smooth & gradualistic; it occurs as an underlying trend. Political lobbies have cherry-picked the temperature points with a downward trend, while deliberately ignoring the basal (far more conspicuous) warming trend. It very disingenuous, an obstruction of the facts.
Yes of course, but what you are failing to take into account is that the reported cooling trend in the last 9 years is not congruent with co2 emissions increasing and thats the big picture here and thats what makes it more significant than just a simple cooling trend.
If we forget that man made co2 ever existed, there would be no panic at all about increasing temperatures because science supports the fact that earths temperature trends are congruent with sun spot activity
Of course they are other factors that influence earths temp I know, but the fact that ALL the planets have been consistently warming at the same rate earth has been warming, due to sun spot activity , there is simply no grounds for blaming man made co2 at all.
Where are people even getting this stuff? Yes, several planets are entering the warming cycle typical of their solar year. This is routine and well known... but what has that got to with earth's carbon cycle? Earth has a unique system. That's the whole point! This argument is totally irrelevant.
Yes; most scientists consider this obvious. In the natural cycle, CO2 increase usually -follows- solar cycles, trailing by several hundred years. The sun first warms the earth, eventually raising CO2 levels (much of it released from stores in the ocean). We don't expect increases in the sun's activity to affect CO2 immediately, let alone in such a geologically miniscule -blip- of 9 years!
I highly doubt CO2 will be "classified" as a toxic, harmful chemical. Anyone who says this is not a scientist, and is in fact a political lobby.
This is precisely the reason why you need to know what "the carbon cycle" is - so you have a frame of reference as to the role of CO2 (and carbon generally) on planet earth. Most people don't even know how carbon functions in earth's ecological, geological, and biological systems. The public is almost entirely illiterate in this basal understanding.
Yes, but what I cant understand is that you are not angry with people like Al Gore clearly distorting science for profit ( BILLIONS)
He has been legally reprimanded about showing that classic graph of his. Previously stating that as co2 goes up then the temp does. When in reality its when temp goes up co2 levels go up as it is released from the sea
The guys a fraud, and Im shocked you have fallen for this. Yes co2 has a negligible warming effect on the earth but nothing significant
Yes, but I'm not being political. I don't care for the politics, I haven't been part of that. I do my work independently. I'm concerned only because nobody seems to understand the science at all. The public hears something that sounds scientific, and presumes that it is.
You need to be educated in basic science to even have a frame of reference. The whole issue of "carbon" and "climate change" requires that you understand earth's carbon cycle. I find the public is consistently illiterate here!
Those guys are so scientifically illiterate, pandering to public paranoia, and stupidity... they elicit abhorrence every time I hear them. And that's not even a political reaction. It's the sheer fact of their prodigious ignorance that is so offensive. I cannot comprehend the level of polarized, partisan stupidity seen in the media these days.
I know right, televised news is absolute garbage. I'm an undergraduate now going for a BS in Biology and I get laughed at when I tell people I spend about 2 hours a day watching youtube videos but it's all Fora, Aronra, DonExodus2(compiled his videos on Evolution into a single file and it is amazingly informative if you watch it all in a sitting) HuffPostFund, Greenman3610, thisdayintheUSA etc.... These are far better sources of information than CNN, MSNBC, or FOX could ever dream of being.
...is that people are calling Thom Yorke a "cokehead" which is laughable if you read about the him cuz Thom is a vegetarian that was never into drugs...the truth? The truth is Thom- unlike the man next to him- isn't wearing make-up, hasn't frozen a gameshow-host hairdo in place with 10 gallons of Aqua Net, isn't wearing a douchey-suit, isn't feigning a newsreporter's demeanor, and isn't hiding disgust. Thom's not a coke-head; just remarkably authentic.
You're damn right. I really can't understand why cokehead would be used on Thom. Being an unusual guy like him, you just can't concentrate on those bullshit from those dissemblers. But it seemed that Thom was trying hard to bear that.
I thought Thom had green eyes ?
Dylanrivers 2 months ago
thom really never says anything cohesive lol
Duckshmm 6 months ago
well the majority of scientits do believe in the "enhanced" greenhouse effect and i think that it is unfair to say that "scientists are all on the gravy train with politicians...
jordanbarker676 7 months ago
I really wish Thom Yorke would give up on this Global Warming agenda. Our planets temperature is forever changing, a hundred years ago the temperature was the same as today. I'm all for being environmental but when it comes to Global Warming I believe it's a farce. And by the way I'm not a right wing douchebag just check my favourites.
23lFrench 7 months ago
@23lFrench wrong, check your facts mate, actually DO some research before you start making comments like that... no offence, im just saying...
jordanbarker676 7 months ago
@jordanbarker676 Show me the evidence that CO2 drives climate change?
23lFrench 7 months ago
@23lFrench simply, the solar radiation is absorbed by the earth and the energy is reflected bak into space. When gases such as CO2 and CH4 are given off the solar energy gets absorbed by the gases trapping the heat. This is OK. The ENHANCED Greenhouse effect is when more gases are released due to human activity more heat gets absorbed and the earth gets warmer. Practically all scientists agree with this, (the ones who don't work for oil companies)...
jordanbarker676 7 months ago
@jordanbarker676 I give the Greenhouse Theory five years before it is completely dead. The globe has started to cooling abruptly as The Sun enters a new Grand Minimum. Cooling oceans will absorb co2. Glaciers have started to grow, Polar bears are thriving and the mountain in Africa still has a snow covered peak. There is no evidence that points to Co2 having a direct impact on climate change. Oil companies are all going along with the idea of global warming....
23lFrench 7 months ago
@jordanbarker676 ...for obvious reasons. Companies are much a lot of money out of this global warming and scientists are all on the gravy train with politicians. The scientists who are skeptics are the ones without any political influence. There are a lot of well respected scientists against the idea that we have a direct influence on climate change. piers Corbyn is an example.
23lFrench 7 months ago
@23lFrench well, it's an interesting subject, but the enhanced greenhouse effect is true and i doubt that it will be "dead"... it would be stupid, though, to reject any ideas... maybe i'm wrong but who knows?? :D
jordanbarker676 7 months ago
@jordanbarker676 It just annoys me when they say we are past the debate stage, I mean if they had undeniable evidence then okay but this is still very much worth debating and discussing. I am yet to find a debate on youtube with the climate change side of the argument actually having a scientist debating for them, it is always the other way round.
23lFrench 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jordanbarker676 Temperatures have been increasing since the end of the Little Ice Age in 1850. Long before we started producing carbon dioxide with power stations and cars. Temperatures increased during the Medieval Warm Period and Decreased during the Little Ice Age. Now temperatures are increasing again. Infact there has been warming and cooling occurring for 3500,000,000 years.
23lFrench 7 months ago
orange his favorite color
Freesia84 8 months ago
Thomas Yorke. The only guy with red pants.
uberbigbread 8 months ago
who wouldn't be acting strange and awkward when patrick bateman is interviewing them.
jorgepeterbarton 8 months ago
fuckin guys retarded to think he's coked out..always goin straight to drug talk..respect his fidgeting
mattdizz21 8 months ago
anything they draw up, if its full of shit, were gonna smell it. and that's good, but its not good enough
connorthesaucejones 8 months ago
Mr.Yorke for World President!
cruzer619 8 months ago
youtube just died...
3kekseund1loch 9 months ago
i've already seen this interview, i only want to listen to him speaking
mestayno 9 months ago 2
if you didn't know who Thom was and saw him being interviewed at something like this you'd think "what a weird guy, he must be a scientist"
ValisX 9 months ago 3
i don't really like his new haircut..but fuck it..still love him!
cityoficecream 10 months ago
that man can hold a microphone!
sammysequins 10 months ago 4
he's not off his tits he's just a bit socially awkward and he has a lazy eye lid.
pickersplayspop 10 months ago
Yorke is wise indeed.
BigballzDeep 11 months ago
Off his tits. A great education was wasted on this fucknuts.
FoFumFilms 11 months ago
Those of us in th U.S. involved in grassroot movements smell the shit and we are sick and tired of politicians making all the decisions, and speaking for us. they are too bound by their parties and reelections. I will do what I can to take care of the earth and continually pester those in power to do something. Thom may not know all the facts but he is out there because he wants to make sure that this planet is still beautiful for his kids to live in! So do I Thom, so thanks for going to this.
iamcitizeninsane1 11 months ago 2
out of his head
cellardoor1973 11 months ago
@winwhateverr
Matthew Bellamy and recently Julian Casablancas.
sh0wbiz 1 year ago
the guy talks about ONU and global stuff... people talk abou the pant he use... Its a f%$#& world....
please watch ZEITGEIST on you tube... think.
cacasarq 1 year ago 8
This has been flagged as spam show
90% reductions by 2050? of what? greenhouse gases? Right... That means we need to almost completely stop using fossil fuels in under 40 years, while increasing population at the same time?
ehveeceebee 1 year ago
90% reductions by 2050? of what? greenhouse gases? Right... That means we need to almost completely stop using fossil fuels in under 40 years, while increasing population at the same time?
ehveeceebee 1 year ago
@ehveeceebee
Technology moves fast, I wouldn't rule out the possibility entirely.
naomifullbloom93 1 year ago
@ehveeceebee
Correct, that's why we're fucked.
mclift12 11 months ago
He is in Red Pants and is so right on!
watchtv121 1 year ago
I'm just curious...who else thinks he's coked as fuck?
ratmasterpro 1 year ago
@ratmasterpro
He always acts like this, it's his personality. He's not coked at all.
Precisely101 1 year ago 2
@ratmasterpro I do ahahhah !
Cestpasmarrant 1 year ago
@ratmasterpro He is not coked.. He wouldn't be coked there! He's just a shy fidgety person
AmelieDemy 10 months ago
coked out his mind
TimsgiarK 1 year ago
@winwhateverr no you asshole serge pizzorno from kasabian wears them all the time you cunt motherfucker
diekontrolleure 1 year ago
@diekontrolleure wow dude calm down. He was just referencing the video. no need for swearing
TheAndrewKyle 1 year ago
@diekontrolleure angry grrrrr
deandave24 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@deandave24 i will kill you and your whole family
diekontrolleure 8 months ago
I think the reason Mr Yorks wearing red trousers is because he's a fan of Jim Hendrix who wore the same trousers at the Monteray pop festival in 1967. And then Thom looks like Hendrix at Woodstock 1969 when he played Glastonbury 2010.
villiparis 1 year ago
XD Im chatting with this guy on Omegle right now!
ImStayingSpiffy 1 year ago
if it's full of shit, we're gonna smell it -- genius xD
takovarra 1 year ago
Comment removed
DarlingRouge 1 year ago
He's too old for me, but Thom is FREAKIN HOT.
shiver0628 1 year ago 23
I dont know why but Thom reminds me of Chris Martin,huh,weird
RisenDawn 1 year ago
there are some hippis here?
that line kill me thom is god
dnnysrock 1 year ago
thom yorke doesnt have a clue what he's talking about with regards to the environment. yeah like maaaan you've seen that al gore film like yeeeah. its crazy this stuff man
astroboirap 1 year ago
ok seriously what is there to NOT LIKE about thom yorke?
and um... 13 people missed the like button.
YA LIVE AND YA LEARN
carouselambra7 1 year ago 4
That's one solid sloshed man
tanihose 1 year ago
Stiffs in suits, whats new?
elffrog 1 year ago
He's got ants in his (red) pants. He's just a fidgety fella. The fact that he's physically showing up at these summits, even though he's a total fish outta water, is a powerful statement in and of itself. Besides, why is he being interviewed by a gameshow host? That's a bit off-putting.
kitgrrrl 1 year ago
god i love thom !!! he looks pretty high :D
knightofeurasia 1 year ago
i agree, Thom is a god !!!
AmnesiacTongueTied 1 year ago
John Lennon would be pleased Thom Yorks complaining about world leader incompetance. Rock musicians should always be anti-establishment.
villiparis 1 year ago 5
@villiparis That's kind of dumb to say. This is far from anti-establishment, this is tryin to get the establishment to man the fuck up and do what's right even if they don't die rich.
Kamatzu 1 year ago
God!! Thom is "the Man" with red pants!!
Camillegutman 1 year ago
LOL Thom avoiding the F word
"Every F-time"
fatfuckfucker 1 year ago
He looks completely uncomfortable and totally annoyed. Rightfully so. Go, Thom, GO!
deleonfire 1 year ago
"I'm the only guy with red pants"
C0DZ0R 1 year ago
hot red pants!
NessaVV 1 year ago
I LOVE when interviewers interview the musician about something not related to their music.
You can often gain more insight into their music by their comments on their philosophy, etc.
threebobs 1 year ago 2
I really like the interviewer, he listens well and asks very good questions in accordance.
GestureStew 1 year ago
fuk thats the second time the fukas blokked me,is tim for or against this climate bollocks.i hope hes not with the co2 camp.i really do with climate gate+31000 scientists trying to sue al gore +japanese scientists with proof its not c02+greenpeace how the..they get on roof of parliament to protest i cant get on roof of ..king local car park for security cameras.+media now talk of "climate change denial lioke its a ..kin disease.
robbynood 2 years ago
thom yorke>Global Warming issues
yeahyeahyaha2 2 years ago 5
That's my brother in law doing the interview. He wasn't thrown off as much as he was intrigued. Great job Stu!
hxdcml83 2 years ago
Politians will never see the way most people think. We see the logical, they make it more difficult and fail to see the simpilicity of some problems sometimes.
I can see why he doesn't want to be around them too much lol.
W78516 2 years ago
i think this guy was really caught off guard by Thom.
like "wow, people in the arts AREN'T all idiots.."
TheMwalk 2 years ago
I think he have to teach me how to be cool.
Orsojka 2 years ago
agreed, Thom yorke is definately God.
insignificantother13 2 years ago 4
I swear man If Thom was not famous anyone would think he is a homeless person! lol
spanishnavax 2 years ago 7
Guys LISTEN. This concerns you, too. Everyone.
endlesky 2 years ago 3
Thom Yorke = GOD!!!
isavares 2 years ago 11
Off Topic: I love Thom's haircut!
kksf07 2 years ago 51
@kksf07 i have to admit...i do too haha
KyostiG 1 year ago
@kksf07 Oh shut up.
NodrogTrax 1 year ago
@kksf07 Oh shut up.
NodrogTrax 1 year ago
@kksf07 yes, it's definitely a good look... haha much better than the blonde years
crushxcrushxbaby 10 months ago
thom looks exhausted and sick; but his comments are well received (well heard) i'm sure. but ignored by those that need to hear them
umbrellaMoo 2 years ago 5
THOM YORKE: YOU ARE PERFECT!
Logases 2 years ago 9
There are major studies of CO2 going back to the mid 1900's! The small amount of CO2 in our atmosphere (284 ppm; pre-industrial 1832) insulates our planet by 50 degrees or more - basic heat-retentive physics! This is fundamental earth science, experimentally known and understood for decades!
THIS is a perfect example of my frustration with disinformation lobbies in the USA. You don't have to know anything about science at all to believe their nonsense.
If you're literate in science, you know.
abyssquick 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Quit the intellectual snobbery. Anybody knows that if the co2 levels go up and the earths temp goes down or vice versar, consistantly over a period of time, then there is no grounds to say that co2 is significantly increasing earths temp
This is what happened when we had somemthing called the ice age!!! The rises in temp which pulled us out of the ice age were in fact more dramatic than the rises we are seeing today. (must have been turbo charged horse and carts obviously)
1madaboutguitar 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You also need to stop seeing Al Gore as seperate to this issue..he is the one who peddled this concept to the extreme.( doesn't that tell you something)
Please think outside the box here, think of the bigger picture and connect all the dots . You cannot seem to look past 'carbon cycles' which is just basic science and does anything to prove man made global warming anything. Im more interested in 'sun spots' as the data is irrefutable
1madaboutguitar 2 years ago
Do I sound like Al gore? I haven't even seen his movie, but the parts I have seen have not impressed me. I'm just talking about the scientific consensus from my field, and attendant research with which I'm familiar...
This climate subject isn't recent to me. This has been going on in the earth sciences for decades. Don't associate it with "Al Gore" because that happens to be the first major mention you've heard of it... take interest in actual science instead of anti-science politics.
abyssquick 2 years ago 2
How is actually being educated in the field, and trying to explain it in some detail "snobbery" ...? I respond because I work in biology, studying the geographical distribution and climactic tolerance of species. I have been observing the creep in latitude for decades. It is palpable that the earth is warming. The patterns of plants and animals indicate it is so. The melting permafrost across northern latitudes indicates it.
And here I am, arguing with some armchair warrior on the internet...
abyssquick 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"And here I am, arguing with some armchair warrior on the internet." You just proved my point
You are refusing to accept:
1) the earth has not warmed for 15 years
2) the earth has been cooling for 9
3) in the last 2 yrs, 24 of the lost 27% north polar ice cap has regained
4) the earth temp is congruent with sun spot activity
5) Between 1940 and 1975 when industry was polluting more co2 than ever temperatures feel dramatically THAT IS NOT A SMALL TREND!
And STILL you are in denial(rolleyes)
1madaboutguitar 2 years ago
Your 3rd point is ridiculous. They are talking about the loss of perennial ice. Perannial ice = ancient ice. Arctic ice always re-freezes in winter, to roughly the same -area- ... but "area" of ice is hardly the same as "volume" of ice. The volume of ice has decreased significantly and continues to do so. This is due to the loss of perennial ice. Soon, in summer, there will be no ice at the poles, when once there always was.
abyssquick 2 years ago 2
No I am not talking about perennial ice. The 24% of ice that has been regained in the last 2 years is measured against the 27% that had been lost in the last 30 years
I have to go now, gotta be up early for xmas tmrw
Opinions aside, MERRY CHRISTMAS TO YOU :0)
1madaboutguitar 2 years ago
Yes; they're talking about "area" not "volume." The area always recovers. the volume does not.
abyssquick 2 years ago 2
6) Polar bear population is 5 times higher than it was in 1950
7) There has never been any decline in solar radiation escaping from the earth
8) I coukld go on and on adn doin
I am no "Armchair Warror" trying to win an argument . I just care about the truth and want people to wake up and realise that the 'bigger picture' is:
A dictatorial global government ,A global currency,A world army, A micro chipped population
And things like GW are just concepts to move that agenda forward/money
1madaboutguitar 2 years ago
Yes, but I don't care about this "One World Government" and I would be against such a thing myself -- but the scientific information says that warming is real. Information from across dozens of independent earth science fields. Including my own. these are observations I make every year. It is happening.
abyssquick 2 years ago 2
The "polar bear population" has little directly to do with the climate cycle. They are one (of many) species which can potentially be affected, but not necessarily. More important are the alleles of a species, and their adjustment to environmental change. People who say this clearly aren't educated in biology, as they presume that : "if warming were real, polar bears would be dying..." or something like that. Such logic is purely uninformed.
abyssquick 2 years ago 3
The earth has warmed significantly for more than the last 15 years. that is utter nonsense. Who says that?
Google: "arbor day climate maps" - you can literally see animations showing latitudinal "zone shift" across the USA, and other regions of the world. I myself am observing warmer climate species occurring more northward every year.... the fact of warming is a given, really.
abyssquick 2 years ago 2
As i already said, it has not "been cooling" for 9 years. If you looked at the graph, you'd see a wide series of highs and lows. What they've chosen is an incidental low, that happens to be lower than one occurring 9 years ago. So whoever is making that claim is exploiting the public's statistical illiteracy.
abyssquick 2 years ago 3
CO2 is quite heat-retentive, even in small amounts. You can do the experiment yourself.
We're familiar with patterns that cause ice ages. It's all rather well mapped thanks to ice core samples, layers, geological research and paleo/climate models. Paleo/climatologists don't just marvel at the expected oscillation of natural cycles. The entire basis of their science -is- the observation of these cycles in the past, and how they affect the present.
It all starts with earth's "carbon cycle."
abyssquick 2 years ago 2
Please watch this 10 min video. It shows why man made global warming is not only false but WHY and will help you connect the dots
Im not asking you to believe anything btw I can give you proof all day long, just ask. But I think the world needs to be open to all possibilities
1madaboutguitar 2 years ago
watch?v=JR1cCIJP-HM
1madaboutguitar 2 years ago
I've seen this video, and it' peripheral. Uninformative. I've seen many like it, and all are consistently illiterate in the basic science behind ecology, climatology, and even chemistry. But then again, I fear their claims do in fact rely on such omissions and an implicit ignorance in the audience.
abyssquick 2 years ago 2
is he wasted?
IprototypeI 2 years ago
He's always been weird. What's your point?
MrSpeoples1 2 years ago
bleah whateva...i'm just saying that he acts like he's on crack or somethin'
quicombo 2 years ago
Your right. Fidgety, can't keep still. Seen the band live once and he spits and slobbers like a madman when singing.
MrSpeoples1 2 years ago
why is he touching his face so much? :| he is acting so weird...
quicombo 2 years ago
Have you ever seen him being interviewed before? He's acting like he always does.
cactaceous 2 years ago
if you don't believe in global warming by now, then you're an idiot and there's no hope for you : )
he's right though, keep the pressure on the politicians and hopefully that'll make them move faster.
sophilianate 2 years ago
I don't want to use the word 'believe' actually, change it to 'agree with enhanced global warming'
sophilianate 2 years ago
Poor Thom, there's nothing worse than being surrounded by a room full of suits.
Blasphemer2 2 years ago 4
Comment removed
zoolnine 2 years ago
Some of the comments I've read here just sickened me. Is this what one gets nowadays for getting off his ass, taking a stance for what he believes in, and trying to make a difference in the world? I don't know if global warming is man-maid or not. I do not know what to believe any more. But what I DO know is that Thom Yorke's dedication is admirable and commendable. And some of you snickering from behind computer screens are just fucking disgraceful. What have YOU done to help anything?
KiandraLaike 2 years ago 9
man-made* (sorry for the typo)
KiandraLaike 2 years ago
It is manmade. This is scientific consensus. The USA has been chrrning out disinformation, meant to confuse the public, make them fight and be indecisive.
Study the science - carbon cycles, feedback, extreme ice loss, and I promise it is all straightforward and logical, palpable and measured.
Ignore the media, political lobbyists and lackeys who shit on science, and try to make it seem tenuous or indecisive. This is not the legitimate state of things. Our effect has been known for decades.
abyssquick 2 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Common people have you not learn the game the wealthy play. this little mouse care more about is trend and just does not get it.
befranklintoo 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Is he drunk?
gamediaries 2 years ago
Where would we be without the informed commentary of "celebs." pfft!
yavanna1969 2 years ago
Ow dear, Thom is one of the most amazing musicians ever BUT... I wish he'd STFU about 'man made' global warming. I am disappointed and angered that so many intelligent are dupped by this bullshit and their love and care of the planet has been used as a target to the secrets societies manipulation
1madaboutguitar 2 years ago
wow, in the same sentence
"I am disappointed and angered that so many intelligent are dupped by this [AGW] bullshit"
"... been used as a target to the secrets societies manipulation"
TruthJunior 2 years ago
Yes, should have thrown in a comma there. Sorry if that caused any offense. Still be grateful, if you read it out loud you would emitted less co2
Seriously, what is your point?
1madaboutguitar 2 years ago
1madaboutguitar you should seriously check your facts .Global warming is REAL.
loyer258 2 years ago 2
@loyer258 so is global cooling and climate cycles
LeGioNoFZioN 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
No you should check YOUR facts and also check peoples comments properly. I didn't say "Global warming wasn't real". I said 'man made' global warming is false.
There is so much evidence to support the fact that the global warming which has occured is perfectly natural and has nothing to do with human co2 emissions.
In fact, the earth has actually been cooling down for the last 9 years. IT REALLY PAYS TO CHECK FACTS PEOPLE WAKE UP!!!
GW is a trojan horse for the NWO
1madaboutguitar 2 years ago
As a scientist: WTF...?
Carbon cycles (i.e. respiration / photosynthesis) on earth are basic high school science.
It's not just climatologists who say global warming is manmade. Physicists, organic chemists, biologists, and many other people who study carbon cycles / solar feedback patterns know this.
We are releasing a very substantial amount of carbon back into the atmosphere, carbon which took many hundreds of millions of years to accumulate, and has been locked away underground for eons.
abyssquick 2 years ago 2
"As a scientist"
Obviously not one of the 30,000+ scientists, including the worlds most qualified weather experts, that claim this is the biggest fruad that has been perpetrated on mankind then...
Shame on you!
Its makes me sick to my stomach that this is actually taught in schools
1madaboutguitar 2 years ago
Id like to know where people are getting this denial junk - I'm aware of some funded disinformation lobbies centered in the USA. I had figured (perhaps wrongly) that people in the USA would be smarter than to be swayed by political pandering.
Given what I have seen in the field during the last 2 decades alone, I find it unbelievable that there is any "debate" (albeit among unspecialized armchair critics) about this subject. The whole ordeal smacks of science illiteracy & political mythology.
abyssquick 2 years ago
I would say "shame on you" for not having enough interest in the subject of science itself to realize the ecological scope of what is being said. If you think "climatologists" and "climate data" are the only sources of this observation, then I don;'t know what else to say. There's a tremendous ecological depth - spread throughout all earth sciences - which has been collecting data on global warming and it's effects for decades.
All I can say is ignore politics. Listen to -field- scientists.
abyssquick 2 years ago
"All I can say is ignore politics. Listen to -field- scientists"
EXACTLY... Couldn't have put it better myself!
That why when:
- The earth as been cooling for 9 years
- 24% of the 27% of the north polar ice which had melted has been regained in the last 2 years
- Polar bears are not just flourishing in population but there numbers have more than DOUBLED in the last 30 years
- In the 1970's, at a point where industry was emitting the most co2 the earth was cooling
IT DOES NOT ADD UP!
1madaboutguitar 2 years ago
In fact in the 1970's the BBC were running documentaries about the coming 'ice age' and they were peddling a term called: 'Global cooling'
You couldn't make it up could you!
Bit like:
-The millennium bug
- The Sars virus
- Swine Flu
Come on people hasn't it clicked yet?
1madaboutguitar 2 years ago
When the political elite want to push forward an agenda like 'worldwide dictatorship' the public will never accept it, So theydisguise it like this:
PROBLEM...REACTION...SOLUTION ...
Problem>>> The earth is getting warmer, polar bears are going to die, city's are going to flood and its all down to co2
Reaction>>>(public get emotion and upset) that upset turns to blame and anger
Solution>>>"Global problems call for global solutions. a world government, a new NWO", (just what we wanted!)
1madaboutguitar 2 years ago 2
Yes, but this is completely out-of-context lobbyist rhetoric, completely unscientific. This is certainly not what field scientists are looking at. If you ask one (and I presume you know at least one...) you will quickly find out how ridiculous these "claims" are. You don't have to know any actual science to believe this stuff. If you are at all interested in science, it becomes obvious there is an anti-science disinformation lobby in the USA. Much like there is with creationism.
abyssquick 2 years ago
All the facts that I have mentioned have come straight from the mouth of the worlds leading experts in that particular field.
The rest is me giving insight, for those who care about whether they live under tyranny or not, of the political and media manipulation. Behind every change that affcects are freedom there is always either a natural, exploited problem or a totally manufactured problem to justify the course of action
1madaboutguitar 2 years ago
In this case, its a total manipulation of perception. NO pollution is not a good thing. YES we should use renewable energy. YES I am concerned about acid rain, but classing something like co2 as a 'toxin' when without it life would cease to exist is the biggest fraud mankind will ever see. Its something Starling would be very proud of
The fact remains all the REAL science has been firewalled off by the media.
Lord muckton has all the correct data at:
science and publicpolicy(dot)org
1madaboutguitar 2 years ago
"classing something like co2 as a 'toxin' when without it life would cease to exist is the biggest fraud mankind will ever see. Its something Starling would be very proud of" ---
The idea that CO2 is a toxin or bad for life on earth is a complete red herring. No honest scientist thinks this! As a biologist, I find the suggestion absurd! That is quite obviously a political move by disinformation lobbies. Nobody thinks that! Jeez, where do people get this stuff?
abyssquick 2 years ago
Well thats what co2 is going to be officially classed as, like it or not.
Although I keep science separate from politics, the two in this instance are both VERY related. The FAKE science which completely misses out the fact that earths temp is in perfect harmony with sun spot activity and that fact that weather stations round the world report there has been a decrease in earths temp in the last 9 years, is being used as the justification for the formation of a new world government
1madaboutguitar 2 years ago
Climatology is decadal. If you arbitrarily link base temperature points in the 100 years, one can easily claim earth has "cooled for years" more than once. This is a statistically illiterate assertion. Obviously climate change is not smooth & gradualistic; it occurs as an underlying trend. Political lobbies have cherry-picked the temperature points with a downward trend, while deliberately ignoring the basal (far more conspicuous) warming trend. It very disingenuous, an obstruction of the facts.
abyssquick 2 years ago
temperature points ** in the last 100 years
abyssquick 2 years ago
Yes of course, but what you are failing to take into account is that the reported cooling trend in the last 9 years is not congruent with co2 emissions increasing and thats the big picture here and thats what makes it more significant than just a simple cooling trend.
If we forget that man made co2 ever existed, there would be no panic at all about increasing temperatures because science supports the fact that earths temperature trends are congruent with sun spot activity
cont...
1madaboutguitar 2 years ago
Of course they are other factors that influence earths temp I know, but the fact that ALL the planets have been consistently warming at the same rate earth has been warming, due to sun spot activity , there is simply no grounds for blaming man made co2 at all.
1madaboutguitar 2 years ago
Where are people even getting this stuff? Yes, several planets are entering the warming cycle typical of their solar year. This is routine and well known... but what has that got to with earth's carbon cycle? Earth has a unique system. That's the whole point! This argument is totally irrelevant.
abyssquick 2 years ago
Yes; most scientists consider this obvious. In the natural cycle, CO2 increase usually -follows- solar cycles, trailing by several hundred years. The sun first warms the earth, eventually raising CO2 levels (much of it released from stores in the ocean). We don't expect increases in the sun's activity to affect CO2 immediately, let alone in such a geologically miniscule -blip- of 9 years!
abyssquick 2 years ago
I highly doubt CO2 will be "classified" as a toxic, harmful chemical. Anyone who says this is not a scientist, and is in fact a political lobby.
This is precisely the reason why you need to know what "the carbon cycle" is - so you have a frame of reference as to the role of CO2 (and carbon generally) on planet earth. Most people don't even know how carbon functions in earth's ecological, geological, and biological systems. The public is almost entirely illiterate in this basal understanding.
abyssquick 2 years ago
Yes, but what I cant understand is that you are not angry with people like Al Gore clearly distorting science for profit ( BILLIONS)
He has been legally reprimanded about showing that classic graph of his. Previously stating that as co2 goes up then the temp does. When in reality its when temp goes up co2 levels go up as it is released from the sea
The guys a fraud, and Im shocked you have fallen for this. Yes co2 has a negligible warming effect on the earth but nothing significant
1madaboutguitar 2 years ago
I don't support Al Gore. I don't appreciate what he is doing. I'm only concerned about science literacy, which seem to be lost in the politics.
abyssquick 2 years ago
Yes, but I'm not being political. I don't care for the politics, I haven't been part of that. I do my work independently. I'm concerned only because nobody seems to understand the science at all. The public hears something that sounds scientific, and presumes that it is.
You need to be educated in basic science to even have a frame of reference. The whole issue of "carbon" and "climate change" requires that you understand earth's carbon cycle. I find the public is consistently illiterate here!
abyssquick 2 years ago
yeah all those scientists with advanced degrees who believe global warming is real are then "dupped" ones.
Isn't there an Alex jones or glenn beck video you're supposed to be watching instead?
PleaseBeamMeHome 2 years ago 5
Those guys are so scientifically illiterate, pandering to public paranoia, and stupidity... they elicit abhorrence every time I hear them. And that's not even a political reaction. It's the sheer fact of their prodigious ignorance that is so offensive. I cannot comprehend the level of polarized, partisan stupidity seen in the media these days.
abyssquick 2 years ago
I know right, televised news is absolute garbage. I'm an undergraduate now going for a BS in Biology and I get laughed at when I tell people I spend about 2 hours a day watching youtube videos but it's all Fora, Aronra, DonExodus2(compiled his videos on Evolution into a single file and it is amazingly informative if you watch it all in a sitting) HuffPostFund, Greenman3610, thisdayintheUSA etc.... These are far better sources of information than CNN, MSNBC, or FOX could ever dream of being.
reed0the0red 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
paul mccartney and now stig of the dump , musicians should stick to what they know , cocain and groupies ,
tonythatjesusloves 2 years ago
What amazes me about these responses...
...is that people are calling Thom Yorke a "cokehead" which is laughable if you read about the him cuz Thom is a vegetarian that was never into drugs...the truth? The truth is Thom- unlike the man next to him- isn't wearing make-up, hasn't frozen a gameshow-host hairdo in place with 10 gallons of Aqua Net, isn't wearing a douchey-suit, isn't feigning a newsreporter's demeanor, and isn't hiding disgust. Thom's not a coke-head; just remarkably authentic.
Mistwaters 2 years ago 24
he does have a load of makeup on
shonuffLA 2 years ago
You're damn right. I really can't understand why cokehead would be used on Thom. Being an unusual guy like him, you just can't concentrate on those bullshit from those dissemblers. But it seemed that Thom was trying hard to bear that.
enchtw 2 years ago 2
couldn't of said it better myself. i just finished reading a book about thom and after reading that everyone else seems weird compared to him.
minimemarcus88 2 years ago 3
It could be just that 'COP 15' is a cover story for other negotiations that are not yet acceptable to the public.....
abirdnamedcat 2 years ago
climate is change come on. Thom you rock, but why do you trust politicians more than scientists?
pjfislord 2 years ago
Fora TV - The world is melting.
NeedsEvidence 2 years ago 4
haha, just goes to show you how the state has turned europeans into statist zombies...
oiuoiu988 2 years ago
yep cocaine! no doubt hahah
metalerohead951 2 years ago
I think he might have a cold but he seems perfectly sober.
itierney 2 years ago 6
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"Europol Says Organized Crime in Charge of EU Carbon Trade" - EUXTV
CRAPCANNONS 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
cokehead
jmeiskues 2 years ago
@jmeiskues idiot
fhavenger09 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
stop talking and go back in the studio and make your music
RichardCorral 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
cock head
PatricksTime 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Wo... stoner.
voyeurdug 2 years ago