3 ms·
"Coal - A Human History" was written by a known environmentalist which bleeds far too much into the content, you shouldn't use it as a trustworthy source for ma
by waihtis 2y ago
"Coal - A Human History" was written by a known environmentalist which bleeds far too much into the content, you shouldn't use it as a trustworthy source for making any conclusions
- throwup238 2y agoDo you have specific examples of inaccuracy or bias in the chapters covering the history of coal in England? If not for your comment, I wouldn't have known that Barbara Freese was an environmentalist.
- waihtis 2y agoPlease refer to this review by Joel M. Kauffman, Professor of Chemistry Emeritus. University of the Sciences in Philadelphia: https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R1Q4KDKM5SNDBA/ref=cm_cr_getr_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=0738204005 https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R1Q4KDKM5SNDBA/re...
- bowsamic 2y ago> There is no correlation of CO2 levels with [global] warming Do you really expect us to accept this review?
- Jensson 2y agoIts from 2008, the case for global warming was much weaker then. Today it is very hard to argue against global warming being caused by Co2, we have 10% more CO2 in the atmosphere today than in 2008 and that is really noticeable.
- bowsamic 2y agoSo the author of the book was right and the review turned out to be wrong
- Jensson 2y agoYeah, I am just defending the person not the study. It is possible other parts of it are reasonable, I haven't read it, just saying that arguing against such things in 2008 didn't mean you were an insane person, but today it does, so that doesn't discredit everything he says like it would if you hear someone argue that today.
- gumby 2y ago> just saying that arguing against such things in 2008 didn't mean you were an insane person I disagree with you — the data and the trends were perfectly clear back then and I remember the political lines were drawn no differently from today. The IPCC started back in 1986 when the problem was considered serious enough for the UN to found a body to investigate. Though perhaps back then there was more controversy, I don’t remember. But I do remember that by 2000 my thinking had shifted to understanding it was a serious problem, though not one I was concerned enough to start working on. Sorry for no footnotes — I’m writing this more as a disagreement of opinion.
- waihtis 2y agoVague international bodies deciding there is a problem is not evidence something genuine is actually happening.
- failuser 2y agoHas anyone actually changed positions on global warming since 2008? The same people who called it a communist hoax back then call it a communist hoax now.
- Jensson 2y agoThe trend continuing with 0.2C added average global temperature the past 16 years ended all sane opposition. > The same people who called it a communist hoax back then call it a communist hoax now. Yes, but the people who didn't think there was enough data then think there is enough data today. Talking about the group that didn't change isn't very useful if you want to find those who did. Today the sane opposition argues that raising temperature isn't a bad thing or that it can be worked around, they don't say that global warming isn't a thing. Edit: If you want proof look at discussion about global warming on conservative reddit, top post says that climate change denial is dumb, the right today doesn't believe that climate change is a conspiracy except for a fringe and the rest of the right think that those are lunatics. This all happened since 2008, if you believe most right wing people today are climate change deniers then you are ignorant, but if you thought so 2008 then you would be not far from right: https://old.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/yzdcqy/global_warming_strikes_again_portions_of_new_york/ https://old.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/yzdcqy/global...
- waihtis 2y agoMany scientists, including generational geniuses like Freeman Dyson have had mixed feelings about CO2 and its effect on climate. I will almost certainly take their opinions on it over an activist environmental lawyer. Review the concept of mimetic theory and understand that the majority holding an opinion doesn't guarantee it being even remotely true.