Prof.Singer is correct in his opening statement that there is no link between temp and CO2 in the climate record. Here is the proof: During the Dinosaur period the CO2 level was 4 to 5 times more than what it is today, but despite this relative high CO2 level, the temp was more or less the same as today.. and the biodiversity was at an all time high. So, the scare that earth will go into a run-away hot house is not true.
'During the Dinosaur period' maybe you mean the cartoon diagram of CO2/Av.T -mya. This diagram shows no real values - it is something like 1 million moving average.
The times you are talking about were in another world, with other species, with another capacity to process the CO2. BTW what caused the mass extinction of species during that period.
If I were to trade at the stock exchange by using such one million (years) moving average I will be Dead-On-Arrival at the trading floor.
The argument that scientists exaggerate to get more funding makes no sense. 97% of working climate scientists say that AGW is happening. All of these scientists say that the solution to AGW is cutting GHG emmissions. If your agrument is valid, once we make the necessary changes to combat GW, there would be no reason to continue telling scary stories about what will happen if we don't change. Deniers attempting to keep controversy alive would mean that more funding is needed to study the problem.
solutions like 20%+ unemployment, live in homes of less than 900 square feet, a diet of <1000 calories per day & a 1 child family restriction enforced with Chinese zeal, no private cars only golf carts and taxes that would crush any economic activity. Except for the eco elite, they will still have 4 mansions, private jets, 20X energy use of an ordinary home, and the life style of the rich and famous. Do as we say not as we do.
Only seven years ago, Fred Singer was saying global warming didn't exist at all. But recently he changed his mind and now says if it is real, it is natural, unstoppable, and beneficial.
Fred Singer is among the most notorious pro-pollution lobbyists-- Singer has denied many scientific realities, including the dangers of second hand smoke, the link between CFCs and ozone depletion, and the fact that UV radiation causes skin cancer.
Singer has received funding from industries of many types.
@SiberianExpress2007 And you think that pro-global warming scientists are unbiased? They get funded too, so they say whatever is most beneficial for them in order to get more grants.
When they mention the urban heat island it reminds me of an indecent a couple years ago when temperature monitoring stations where competing to register 100 degrees first, so one guy had the roof re surfaced so it would hold the heat better.
ABC News has reported that Singer insists he is not on the payroll of the energy industry, but admits he once received an unsolicited $10,000 from Exxon.
Too much CO2 is very harmful to both claimte and oceans. Its a big problem huge actually and i think its great good money is payed to fix it. The guys making silly amounts in protecting the oil and coal industries should be investigated properly for they spread loads of junk science and propaganda.
Given that the existence of CO2 is vital to life , and that their is and always was CO2 in the oceans why would you make suchj a ridiculous statement ! You a scientist or an Al Gore groupy ? EH what happened to SAAB Why did you let GM get it and wreck it ?
@klnine Let´s apply that argument to another gas, oxygen. We need it for life, therefor by (your) definition, we can´t have too much oxygen. Only problem is, in a pure oxygen enviroment: fire + almost anything = kaboom. Oxygen, natures lifegiving bomb.
I find it interesting how as time goes on prof Bob Watson sounds less and less convinced by his own arguments. It's nice to see a civilized debate rather than name calling for a change.
"as time goes on prof Bob Watson sounds less and less convinced by his own arguments"
.
It is worse than that! Singer sounds more and more convincing ... for the lay person.
Gladly science is not decided by a public debate. In a public debate the best debater always wins. This usually is the debater that tells the most nonsense and lies as well. Telling the truth, knowing the difficulties, admitting that you don't know everything is more scientific but less convincing.
but seriously....cmon..its an ice age..its a warming age..my advice...worry about what happens if they get the bill in...i mean cmon this is monty pythons dead parrot sketch..
Rise of POINT .75 degrees over 150 years, and it's now getting COLDER!
Did the NWO global warmist just ADMIT that it''s getting colder, and then turn around and say that the past ten years have been the warmest "on record"? He really can't keep his story straight.
The ice-core samples show the TRUTH, which is that Gore's charts were a FRAUD. Historically, C02 levels rise AFTER temperatures rise, NOT before. It's simple, temps rise, ice melts, more life, more C02 rises= more cow farts.
Prof.Singer is correct in his opening statement that there is no link between temp and CO2 in the climate record. Here is the proof: During the Dinosaur period the CO2 level was 4 to 5 times more than what it is today, but despite this relative high CO2 level, the temp was more or less the same as today.. and the biodiversity was at an all time high. So, the scare that earth will go into a run-away hot house is not true.
oomblikkies 6 months ago
@oomblikkies
'During the Dinosaur period' maybe you mean the cartoon diagram of CO2/Av.T -mya. This diagram shows no real values - it is something like 1 million moving average.
The times you are talking about were in another world, with other species, with another capacity to process the CO2. BTW what caused the mass extinction of species during that period.
If I were to trade at the stock exchange by using such one million (years) moving average I will be Dead-On-Arrival at the trading floor.
U1T001 6 months ago
Comment removed
anthropoceneman 9 months ago
IPCC = Incompetents Passing Correlation as Causation.
toulouse666 1 year ago
@toulouse666
Other solution:
IPCC = International pack of climate crooks.
Gardien48 1 year ago
The argument that scientists exaggerate to get more funding makes no sense. 97% of working climate scientists say that AGW is happening. All of these scientists say that the solution to AGW is cutting GHG emmissions. If your agrument is valid, once we make the necessary changes to combat GW, there would be no reason to continue telling scary stories about what will happen if we don't change. Deniers attempting to keep controversy alive would mean that more funding is needed to study the problem.
SiberianExpress2007 1 year ago
@SiberianExpress2007
solutions like 20%+ unemployment, live in homes of less than 900 square feet, a diet of <1000 calories per day & a 1 child family restriction enforced with Chinese zeal, no private cars only golf carts and taxes that would crush any economic activity. Except for the eco elite, they will still have 4 mansions, private jets, 20X energy use of an ordinary home, and the life style of the rich and famous. Do as we say not as we do.
cupera1 1 year ago
Only seven years ago, Fred Singer was saying global warming didn't exist at all. But recently he changed his mind and now says if it is real, it is natural, unstoppable, and beneficial.
Fred Singer is among the most notorious pro-pollution lobbyists-- Singer has denied many scientific realities, including the dangers of second hand smoke, the link between CFCs and ozone depletion, and the fact that UV radiation causes skin cancer.
Singer has received funding from industries of many types.
SiberianExpress2007 1 year ago 3
@SiberianExpress2007 And you think that pro-global warming scientists are unbiased? They get funded too, so they say whatever is most beneficial for them in order to get more grants.
FazeMvd 1 year ago
Watson should know better !
klnine 1 year ago
When they mention the urban heat island it reminds me of an indecent a couple years ago when temperature monitoring stations where competing to register 100 degrees first, so one guy had the roof re surfaced so it would hold the heat better.
KnockoffNigeI 1 year ago
ABC News has reported that Singer insists he is not on the payroll of the energy industry, but admits he once received an unsolicited $10,000 from Exxon.
natty6434 1 year ago
@natty6434 met too I I sued to be a consultant for them. Cheapest money I ever got !
klnine 1 year ago
Too much CO2 is very harmful to both claimte and oceans. Its a big problem huge actually and i think its great good money is payed to fix it. The guys making silly amounts in protecting the oil and coal industries should be investigated properly for they spread loads of junk science and propaganda.
TheSwedechris 2 years ago
@TheSwedechris
Given that the existence of CO2 is vital to life , and that their is and always was CO2 in the oceans why would you make suchj a ridiculous statement ! You a scientist or an Al Gore groupy ? EH what happened to SAAB Why did you let GM get it and wreck it ?
klnine 2 years ago
@klnine Let´s apply that argument to another gas, oxygen. We need it for life, therefor by (your) definition, we can´t have too much oxygen. Only problem is, in a pure oxygen enviroment: fire + almost anything = kaboom. Oxygen, natures lifegiving bomb.
imorio 1 year ago
/watch?v=m9ikE1foaJI
Tacair1 2 years ago
I'm totally shocked that the BBC actually had a balanced discussion on this topic. It's a first.
vsaluki 2 years ago 18
This has been flagged as spam show
@vsaluki,
.
"I'm totally shocked that the BBC actually had a balanced discussion on this topic. It's a first."
.
I'm totally shocked that the BBC actually had an unbalanced discussion on this topic. Science versus opinion.
wimahlers 6 months ago
Comment removed
STEELE2211 2 years ago
Are there more videos that continue this debate?
robrec0rd 2 years ago
I find it interesting how as time goes on prof Bob Watson sounds less and less convinced by his own arguments. It's nice to see a civilized debate rather than name calling for a change.
LeJimster 2 years ago 20
@LeJimster,
.
"as time goes on prof Bob Watson sounds less and less convinced by his own arguments"
.
It is worse than that! Singer sounds more and more convincing ... for the lay person.
Gladly science is not decided by a public debate. In a public debate the best debater always wins. This usually is the debater that tells the most nonsense and lies as well. Telling the truth, knowing the difficulties, admitting that you don't know everything is more scientific but less convincing.
wimahlers 6 months ago
The NWO alarmists are using the fear of global warming in order to:
1 -slap a carbon tax on everything that moves.
2 - Use this tax to fund the centralisation of power into a tyrannical, unelected one world government.
3 - Enforce their evil wil on the people: from forced 'vaccinations' to mass sterilisation and population reduction,
They are all in on it: government, press, industry, education, science and the military.
XTL446 2 years ago 7
Im not your slave globalists
Graham6762 2 years ago 2
did i hear a torrent finishing at 7:57? lol
but seriously....cmon..its an ice age..its a warming age..my advice...worry about what happens if they get the bill in...i mean cmon this is monty pythons dead parrot sketch..
TulwarKahn 2 years ago
The global warming guys are "pining for the fjords".
meshlife88 2 years ago 2
Rise of POINT .75 degrees over 150 years, and it's now getting COLDER!
Did the NWO global warmist just ADMIT that it''s getting colder, and then turn around and say that the past ten years have been the warmest "on record"? He really can't keep his story straight.
The ice-core samples show the TRUTH, which is that Gore's charts were a FRAUD. Historically, C02 levels rise AFTER temperatures rise, NOT before. It's simple, temps rise, ice melts, more life, more C02 rises= more cow farts.
joygarner 2 years ago 7
lol
TheHairyHeart 2 years ago
Great and calm debate!! At last BBC talks about a debate in climate and CLIMATEGATE is refered.
henriques36 2 years ago 4
Thanks for posting. I like that they stayed calm and did not interrupt each other as sometimes happens in debates like this.
Jspeterson 2 years ago 4