Lovelock is now aged somewhere into his 90s.
The earlier ref to him was an article from a few years ago so apols for getting his age mixed up.
I do like his approach to critical thinking, even though we could all disagree with one or more aspects of his conclusions.
Also, he is quite prepared to modify his views based on further evidence which is the essence of the good science of the past few hundred years of "the enlightenment".
From 2013:
James Lovelock: A man for all seasons

Matt Ridley's 'The Positive Optimist' is a good read, showing how various catastrophes have entered the public mind (e.g. the Millennium Bug), never to appear, and that despite all this, people are still better off living today than ever before.

Worth a read!

Lol Having studied Climate Science a long time ago I don't need any lectures on natural climate change although it seems some of the deniers do.

To be fair I suspect any Geologist would debate if your 2 photos are evidence of climate change or rather geology in action:oops2:

To add to a couple of those points.

The belief systems of homo sapiens have evolved and will continue to do so.
In most places I think we have stopped making blood sacrifices, including of humans, to the Sun and Moon every so often; but somewhere in the world some kind of witch doctor status geezer may be doing something of that nature right now.
Education has to be a key element in this, but by who and for what ends?

I haven't seen flippancy so far in this discourse; it is possible I suppose and black humour can be an antidote in itself in "difficult cases".

Much of what Lovelock has written in the past deals with this IMO: "mankind is very adaptable and will muddle through one way or the other" might paraphrase him in the proverbial nutshell.

Ideologies; all of them, there lies the enemy.

He has published quite a lot I think including some TED talks.
"The rational optimist" perhaps?
Rational Optimist Book | Matt Ridley

That's the one, thanks :)

It, the solution, was influenced by Californian policies of the day apparently - I didn't know that, until now.
The misuse of Malthus | Matt Ridley

I was aware that USA sourced state-of-the-art-of-the-day programming machines (supplied by IBM IIRC) were used to coordinate the Nazi eugenic policy.
Nothing gets in the way of business.

:offtopic:? Possibly not.


ps
Read on in that blog and there is passing reference to UN ideology right up to the present day.

In the perspective of climate change, motorcycle travel seems one of the least things to worry about.

Interestingly enough, the consumption of fossil fuels does not only contribute to the climate change, but it also sponsors the religion inspired violence in the middle east and far beyond (including 9/11, Paris and all those things in between, including boko haram, including why the Sahara currently is off limits for a very large part). Think of that when you fuel up... .

And yes, the world has seen climate change in the past. Much longer than 6000 years ago. And tempartures and sea levels can be very well correlated to atmospheric CO2 concentration. Maybe that doesn't proof anything, but... . Don't we wear protective clothing just in case... . Don't we treat our water, just in case... .

From the reading I have done elsewhere, the correlation is that the increases in atmospheric CO2 have followed the respective ice ages; in other words, they are a result of climate change rather than the cause.

Sea levels have changed by about 12 inches in a century I have just been reading, which provides more than enough time for man to adapt - London did so actually with the construction of the Thames flood barrier in the 1970s, a project that followed on from rational debate of the day.

Meanwhile, while the ice sheet of the Artic has decreased in recent times, that of the Antartic has increased, so I read.
I have seen this reported elsewhere and there is a concept in play that one compensates for the other i.e. over a long time, each one shrinks and expands in a form of Gaia-like balance.

I was amused by the research ship of a couple of years ago that visited Antartica with the express intention of "proving" the ice sheet there was shrinking (good idea; lets adopt an ideology and set out to prove it correct) - in short, the ship got stuck in the ice and the researchers had to be rescued, no doubt at great expense and expenditure of various forms of emissions by someone.

Finally, for now:
"One recent survey shows that 27% of US Democrats are in favour of prosecuting climate sceptics. This is the mentality of religious fanaticism, not scientific debate".
Five articles on climate change | Matt Ridley

No wonder the 50 states of the union have little faith in their federal government.

My thanks go to Mollydog for raising a great question for the new year.
If this whole subject were to be considered in court it might be thrown out as "not proven".

It will not affect us so much as we are rich but shure if the world population doubles there will be more fights and wars about the recources on this planet so traveler will become more visa problems.

I don't think anyone has mentioned in here, over the past summer of travels, the 1 million who have entered Germany (not Europe, but Germany specifically because that is where they want to be).
I fully expected someone to mention having seen this recent migration during their travels.

Perhaps that movement was insignificant - not sufficiently massive and/or not sufficiently forced?
Time will tell.


Hans Rosling has a very concise argument for why the population will not double.
Nevertheless, the fight for resources will continue if only in lieu of the earlier battles for living space into which tribes can expand - some historians say that was why the Zulu engaged the British in battle.
The Zulu Rubicon was crossed, in the Zulu mind at least.

Well but thats not because of clima change but because of money reasons.
While the people could live in peace in many other countrys as well they chose to migrate to germany because in Germany they will not only get a flat and food for free but also more cache money and children money and old peoples care etc. then they would earn while working in their home countrys or somewere else.

Right now they are building thousends of new houses for imigrants. They never did this for homeles german people.

The german governmet sees it selfe as the middle of the world but has forgotten how small Germany actually is and that they will not be able to feed everyone, if the news of free money spreads through all of Africa and Asia.

Ah and most importend: While the Government invited the people to come its not them who will have to pay for the costs of all the imigrants but its the small working german population who allready pays for Greece, Irland, Portugal, Spain, Italy, Romania etc. because nowbody ever asked them. The German depts are 80% of the tax income per year or 26.816 Euro per german citizen and rising. Now houses of imigrants are burning...

Correct, but it is not just big oil, that is nonsense perpetuated by the left to demonize. From sweatshops to oil, to diamonds lots of reason for conflicts, most of which do not need to be happening. However leave it to a government to make sure YOU the consumer are at fault, you are not.
you like anyone else need to exist, you do not put forth the rules which dictate horrible or good corporations. There was a time when we could choose with our pocket books, now you are forced to buy from a handful of corporations boo on them.

Co2 is also part of our atmosphere which saves us from being baked from the Sun, that convenient part is left out.
Things which need to be worried about is pollution in general, mostly from organic Chemicals.

I actually held his theory although on the Biblical fear end (If anyone at this point thinks I am a holy roller, your reading comprehension is very much lacking) as a means of control. However the premise of his thoughts are correct, please do your own research, it is how I came from the global warming side.

I grew up in what is now the worlds largest reclamation site, so I hvae a very different view of pollution than most. For your consideration
Thoughts of the Ages: When will it end?

State of Fear - MichaelCrichton.com

I didn’t want to write it. I decided I wouldn’t write it. I had breakfast with a friend of mine who I hadn’t seen in 30 years and I told them my dilemma and he said no, you have to write it. I said I might get killed for this. He said, no, you have to write it. I would like to be able to say that as a result of that conversation I decided to write it. I didn’t. I went home and I thought, you know, I’m not writing this. It doesn’t matter. Keep my opinion to myself. I started to work on something else and I felt like a coward and I thought what are you going to do? You have looked at the data and you really believe that it’s in effect but not something that we as human beings should be worrying about. […] It’s low on the totem pole. We ought to be taking care of disease. We ought to be taking care of world hunger. We ought to be taking care of a lot of things before we do this.

I cannot believe I am the first to point out, that Hollywood has proven we will ride on!:funmeteryes:

Attachment 16797

Attachment 16798

Attachment 16799

Well said young man (you have to be younger than me :thumbup1:).

On your final point, you are not alone - until today I had forgotten or never knew (that age thing again!) that Viscount Ridley has a blog.
Here is an extract from about 4 weeks ago: as I say, you are not alone.

"The Paris climate has attracted about 40,000 conference delegates and camp followers, ranging from politicians and civil servants to journalists and campaigners. I don’t have the numbers, but I would be willing to bet that a very small number of them paid their own air fares or hotel bills. A goodly proportion will have sent the bill to taxpayers in various countries, either directly or via the grants that governments give to green pressure groups.
Perhaps the politicians should stop listening to the vested interest of the Green Blob begin asking what long-suffering taxpayers and real voters think about hitting poor people today so as to raise the incomes of very rich people by 1.3% in 2100?"
It is the summary of his blog entry here, for reference:
Five articles on climate change | Matt Ridley

ps
I didn't read your earlier posts as coming from the perspective of a "bible thumper" but it can be easy to misread the written word.
Of course, there was an era when it was forbidden, on pain of death, to print the bible and disseminate it to the common man - such would never do for the simple reason that it would undermine the power of the church of the day.