Cambon Posted May 22 Share Posted May 22 29 minutes ago, code99 said: "One passenger died of a heart attack and 30 more were injured when Singapore Airlines flight SQ321 hit severe turbulence early on Wednesday morning". A report from the University of Reading last year suggested turbulence could worsen with climate change: "Our latest future projections indicate a doubling or trebling of severe turbulence in the jet streams in the coming decades if the climate continues to change as we expect," said Professor of Atmospheric Science Paul Williams, one of the authors. Sounds like he is a band wagon jumper. It was also being said that since 1979, reported cases of severe turbulence, causing injury were up 55%. This was seen as very positive, as the number of air passengers had increase from just under 1 billion a year in 1980 to just under 5 billion at the beginning of 2020. A five fold increase. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two-lane Posted May 22 Share Posted May 22 Perhaps flight time should be included as a factor in the analysis. There are more long-distance flights now than there were 20 years ago. Sitting with your seat belt on for 17 hours would be a bit uncomfortable. [What happened to the DVT panic?] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RecklessAbandon Posted May 23 Share Posted May 23 A short answer to the original question - No. Longer answer - No, and anyone who says otherwise either has a vested interest in maintaining the status quo (billionaires with investments in fossil fuels, air lines, car manufacture, etc) or people who listen to the billionaires and believe everything they say (usually by means of billionaire owned media - Musk drones are a good example). Queue the "climate scientists are only in it for the money" drones or "experts" who have spent 0.00000000001% of the time "researching" compared to the hordes of actual scientists doing actual research. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeteroErectus Posted May 23 Share Posted May 23 2 hours ago, RecklessAbandon said: A short answer to the original question - No. Longer answer - No, and anyone who says otherwise either has a vested interest in maintaining the status quo (billionaires with investments in fossil fuels, air lines, car manufacture, etc) or people who listen to the billionaires and believe everything they say (usually by means of billionaire owned media - Musk drones are a good example). Queue the "climate scientists are only in it for the money" drones or "experts" who have spent 0.00000000001% of the time "researching" compared to the hordes of actual scientists doing actual research. Do you think billionaires investments are set in stone? They move their money into whatever is the flavour of the month with the masses. You mention Musk, he couldn't be a better example. For the last decade, he's benefited (understatement) from people around the world becoming more "green". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted May 23 Share Posted May 23 18 hours ago, Cambon said: Sounds like he is a band wagon jumper. It was also being said that since 1979, reported cases of severe turbulence, causing injury were up 55%. This was seen as very positive, as the number of air passengers had increase from just under 1 billion a year in 1980 to just under 5 billion at the beginning of 2020. A five fold increase. The main factor in altering incidents of air turbulence since 1980 would be much better information for pilots regarding where these would be likely to take place, so they could take avoiding action. So any increase in the number of incidents would be surprising. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Phantom Posted May 23 Share Posted May 23 3 hours ago, RecklessAbandon said: A short answer to the original question - No. Longer answer - No, and anyone who says otherwise either has a vested interest in maintaining the status quo (billionaires with investments in fossil fuels, air lines, car manufacture, etc) or people who listen to the billionaires and believe everything they say (usually by means of billionaire owned media - Musk drones are a good example). Queue the "climate scientists are only in it for the money" drones or "experts" who have spent 0.00000000001% of the time "researching" compared to the hordes of actual scientists doing actual research. Short answer to original question - No. Longer answer - Climate change is undeniable. The real question is whether it's a natural fluctuation or whether it's manmade. For the record, I think we're to blame. There have been similar swings in the climate historically, but they have never been as fast, or if they have, there is an obvious reason (usually a volcanic eruption or a meteor strike). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RecklessAbandon Posted May 23 Share Posted May 23 1 hour ago, HeteroErectus said: Do you think billionaires investments are set in stone? They move their money into whatever is the flavour of the month with the masses. You mention Musk, he couldn't be a better example. For the last decade, he's benefited (understatement) from people around the world becoming more "green". You mean other than the literal millions of tonnes of pollution he has pumped into the air with his Space X experiments or the damage he caused to water tables with his "Boring" tunnels? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shake me up Judy Posted May 23 Share Posted May 23 On 5/22/2024 at 7:13 AM, ian rush said: Interesting company Paul Burgess keeps https://prnewslink.net/releases/31815.html Level with the electorate: are you a racis who likes conspiracy theories Stu? What does that link prove to you then ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeteroErectus Posted May 23 Share Posted May 23 19 minutes ago, RecklessAbandon said: You mean other than the literal millions of tonnes of pollution he has pumped into the air with his Space X experiments or the damage he caused to water tables with his "Boring" tunnels? I didn't say anything contrary? Or regarding his environmental impact at all? You said there was a status quo. That those evil billionaires want us all to keep using fossil fuels or that we are all victims of their propaganda. That's not true. The billionaires make their money delivering what we as a collective want now and in the future, which has been becoming more and more "green" for years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambon Posted May 23 Share Posted May 23 1 hour ago, The Phantom said: Short answer to original question - No. Longer answer - Climate change is undeniable. The real question is whether it's a natural fluctuation or whether it's manmade. For the record, I think we're to blame. There have been similar swings in the climate historically, but they have never been as fast, or if they have, there is an obvious reason (usually a volcanic eruption or a meteor strike). Short answer to original question- No. Longer answer - Climate change is undeniable. Manmade emissions have very likely accelerated the effects. Many people have been trying for decades to cut back on emissions and lower carbon footprints. This may or may not have had an effect. However, big business now sees the opportunity to literally rape people of their wealth through greenwashing. So many brainwashed people are an easy target. Will all these expensive, grandiose schemes have any affect on climate change? No. As I have said before, once IOMG have bankrupted the country with pointless windmills and other green initiatives, I hope they have a warm fuzzy feeling inside when they go cap in hand to the uk government for either a bail out or to become a new uk county. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted May 23 Share Posted May 23 the climate may be changing but man has zero effect on whether that happens or not , the earth has gone through hot and cold long before man and industrialisation ever entered into it ,, believing we can do something about it is a fallacy designed to extract money from us to suppprt people that don't have a real job 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoTail Posted May 23 Share Posted May 23 2 hours ago, WTF said: the climate may be changing but man has zero effect on whether that happens or not , the earth has gone through hot and cold long before man and industrialisation ever entered into it ,, believing we can do something about it is a fallacy designed to extract money from us to suppprt people that don't have a real job Bollocks 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted May 23 Share Posted May 23 1 hour ago, NoTail said: Bollocks Its sad that such ignorance exists. But you will never change their view. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted May 23 Share Posted May 23 4 hours ago, Cambon said: Many people have been trying for decades to cut back on emissions and lower carbon footprints. Who are these people? Decades? It hadn't been a 'thing' that long has it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted May 23 Share Posted May 23 1 hour ago, Happier diner said: Who are these people? Decades? It hadn't been a 'thing' that long has it? Perhaps not CO2, but CFCs (remember when aerosols and fridges were the devil?), leaded petrol and general pollution. There has been an awareness of what is being pumped into the atmosphere for a long, long time. The suspects may have changed, but not the concerns. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.