2:35 "If you want to stop uncontrolled immigration, you might want to prevent the southern hemisphere from becoming uninhabitable." *I need this on T-shirts.*
Are you aware of the 21st century? Printing T-shirts is a day to day occurrence and not only by child slave labour in china. Even you are possibly capable, I'm assuming you're not in a vegetative state and have the use of your limbs. Or just keep making ....... comments.
Preferably made in sweatshops in asia from material produced in south america and then sold all over the world , yes this will solve the issue of making the southern hemisphere more inhabitable ! Brilliant idea ! I bet you were the brightest in your class weren't you ? Well now that explains the screenname.
So, I just discovered the Mash Report, this is only my second one viewed and I am officially in love with Rachel Parris. I normally hate these kind news satire of shows in America, but the British actually know how to do satire right, since they basically invented the art form.
I wonder why this clip hasn't gone viral? Well done the BBC, for having the integrity not to be obvious and exploit the 'sex sells' ethos...and thanks Nish, for being in the thumbnail.
What I took from this video is "don't let Gove go floppy, because if he does, he'll have a higher chance of surviving when someone - inevitably - pushes him out of a second floor window. And that will be the end of us".
The premise of the show is that Nish Kumar is the official host, but he just gets walked over by her for comedic value. She is the host for all intents and purposes.
The people saying its the fault of the companies need to realise by refusing to buy from those and consuming from green companies you can make a difference
@@TCt83067695 Yes, you might have to use gas to get to work but how does that stop you from buying products from "greener" companies? You can still choose to stop buying from companies who contribute to pollution and support the companies who try to change and make a difference. You can also choose to look at your lifestyle as a whole and try your best to cut down your carbon footprint. From using less electricity and water, avoiding food waste, buying less stuff you don't really need and trying to reduce your trash production - there are so many ways you can help! Just drinking one less cup of coffee a day is a start. And when it comes to your daily commute, there are a number of things you can do: - Make sure to check your tire pressure every month - Remove any unneeded weight off your car - Get your car serviced to make sure the engine is running efficiently - Drive more economically - Plan your trips and drive less (eg. shop in a store on your route home instead of making a second trip) All of these things can save you a whole lot of gas in the long run (+ save you money), and drastically reduce your CO2 footprint. It IS that easy, we all need to do our best and we need to stop making excuses.
@@lauragrubbe that wasnt what i asked. Besides you've admited it's not possible to completely cut out those polluting companies like the op implied. It wasnt excuse. It is just fact. Your suggestions notwithstanding tho...
Also realize that those SAME COMPANIES create manipulative ad campaigns that attack your self-esteem, telling you to buy their worthless shit! Stop trying to give them an out they don't deserve.
First, often there is no green alternative. Second, usually the green alternative is more expensive and for people who don't have a lot of money that will be a problem. Third, most of those green companies are owned by bigger, non-green companies. So in the end you're giving them money anyways. The fault lies with the companies, not the consumers.
@robert hicks Sure. There's always the idiots who almost kill us. Today it's antivaxxers, tomorrow it's gonna be you (you're more likely to be successful.) People didn't get brighter or more educated with the advent of the Internet unfortunately.
Its unfortunately true that no matter how much you show people the truth they are going to be willing to throw away the future to some scammer trying to eradicate poverty, and in the process line his or her own pocket. No matter how much you try to educate them to the truth, they have been programmed by liberal schools to accept the UN as some sort of "second coming" messiah.
I'm not a climate denier, I believe the scientific consensus. However, unfair to rule out nuclear as a source of power because modern nuclear power is least damaging to the planet in terms of pollution and CO2. Yes, there is nuclear waste, but technologies are also being developed to recycle much of the modern nuclear waste as fuel again. The solution isn't renewables only, still need ability to meet base load surges.
I'm reasonably sure that Nish doesn't know all of Rachel's presentations ahead of time. If he does, he is fantastic at performing the facial expression known as amused disgust.
Jonathan Pearce Let's not forget that science is not the be all and end all of convenient or inconvenient truths. Governments and agencies have spun us all yarns in the past, and no doubt some are being spun today, yet even more are yarns being prepared to be spun henceforth in what we laughably refer to as "The Future"! Personally, I find it difficult to put all my faith in anything that has a branch which indulges in animal experimentation! The bastards!!!
The problem is, that the real science does NOT support agw. Read REAL peer review magazines in science specific journals and you find that much of what pass the pal review magazine is bull. As for conspiracy, its a long known fact that if you control information flow, you control people's opinion. In North Korea, for instance, people are told that NK is much larger than the US. IF you have ever seen a globe from NK, it shows that the majority of the world is in asia, and NK is the majority of asia. When people escape form NK, they are surprised at the size of the world. In China, ww2 was called the war of Japanese aggression and they are taught that China defeated the Japanese by themselves and it was the communist that did the majority of the fighting. In agw, a tiny group of people control the data flow to the public and that is why people think that it is the majority that support it.
This is the only the second Rachael bit I've seen and I'm hooked! She's brilliant. That said, the biggest problem in the UK is NIMBYism. Wind farms do pretty well and they'd do damn well in the UK where we have the weather to make use of them. I'd stick wind turbines down the central reservations of every motorway for starters and/or hard shoulder verge and every turbine in the countryside could be painted camo. Plus, all new buildings should have an outer skin of solar panels. Also, upgrade all motorways with rails above the hard shoulder so freight that would normally be taken by lorry gets put onto the rails and automatically routed to hubs at the intended destination where lorries pick them up and take them the rest of the way. Millions of lorry miles evaporate. Instead of replacing worn roads with new tarmac, replace them with surfaces with embedded induction loops which will increase the range of electric vehicles because they're constantly getting trickle charged. Add hydroelectricity and anything I've forgotten and you're done.
The real shame of it is: "There's NO point in the UK even trying to address climate change ". We are far too small a player and ANYTHING we do is utterly swallowed up by the largest polluters of the planet - the USA, China and Russia. Until there is a worldwide consensus and agreement, there's no value in the UK crippling our own industries and throwing away our own employment prospects. I once believed fully in the "save the world" mantra, but after 25 years of doing my best in the face of absolute worldwide apathy - I GIVE UP!
Is there anyone here who slightly admits that given the actual homosapiens attitude, generally speaking, is pretty much impossible to slow the climate change and diminish the effects? We consume too much of everything in a very convenient way to us. We were taught to consume for our convenience and for sellers profits. We're to many (7.7 bln) and old habits die hard.
If they were serious about fixing the "problem," the solutions would be top-down...not forced upon end users and consumers. The ones most capable of doing something are given a pass. Alternative energy won't work. Solar has limited locales where it works well. Wind is crazy expensive and has negative environmental impacts to build, maintain and operate. Nuclear is the best option, but people are opposed to it...even as we find ways to use nuclear waste to generate power.
Plant Earth is billions of years old. Humans evolved yesterday and won’t be around for too much longer. The question should be: do you want a fast extinction or a slow extinction? The outcome will be the same.
But Hinkley is a Nuclear power station. It is actually good for the environment seen as nuclear energy is a clean alternative to fossil fuels. So I don't get why she needed to make fun of it.
Net Average Temperatures dropping worldwide since 2014, Grand Solar Minimum is starting as predicted and cold is expected to be similar to Maunder Minimum. Thames River in England should be freezing again as in 1665. @10 years ago a CO2 study (UVA, VA) showed 410 ppm CO2 on West coast monitors and 330ppm on East coast. USA is a 80ppm per westerly wind passage CO2 sink. US/Canada & Mexico remove about 400 ppm CO2 from Northern Hemisphere each growing season.
@@paulgus73 do you REALLY think I don't know this. the weakness of the denier arguments just doesn't warrant response so I won't. the answer is NO we are not going to be saved by a mini ice age in the next 15 years... and besides this is a side issue. nobody is arguing that CO2 is the only factor in global temps... solar irradiance is the major one undoubtedly. that does not change the fact that the greenhouse effect we have created has dire probable consequences. god I hope that a mauder minimum buys us time to resolve but everything I have read (with one exception) states that the forecast models take the MM in to account and whilst there is some cooling associated with, it is not going to reverse the trend. indeed I do believe we should have been in the cooling cycle since the early 2000s or maybe 2008... I don't remember which.
@@paulgus73 Abe - sorry if I was a little rude. I would really love you to be right! ...but from what I have read this has already been taken in to account in projections.
Humour provides good delivery but without a final moment of dead pan fails to deliver. She should have wrapped this gag up by simply staring into the camera starkly after the 'fucking it' line, because truly it is stark now, would have made more of an impact less performance oriented
Angus Hulme - All of the models and projections examined by scientists use a steady state Sun light only spectrum as the only Solar source output. All neglect or ignore planetary contributions to the Sun's motion about the Center of Mass of the system. All of them refuse to model Earth Magnetosphere changes, Solar flares, Solar Magnetite flux coupling conditions and cyclic output of solar cycles. None include the 11-13 year primary, 172 year minor planetary coupling, 515 year planetary alignment coupling and the 1030 year major planetary coupling cycles. If you would like some primary sources, I can give you some advice. I don't deny climate change, I study it using Solar Physics and Planetary Science. I've not just studied Solar Physics but taught it at the college level. The potential minor contribution of trace gases pales to statistical insignificance in the face of massive changes in Solar output during a major cycle minimum event. We are facing just such an event. Thank you for your polite discourse, Angus. Best wish for the holidays. Doc
An Account if I was presented a button that would make the above happen, the people would feel no pain, they wouldn't know what happened or what was, but the catch is I would always be one of those people, I would press the button for the sake of humanity.. :/ unfortunately not gonna happen, everyone go green?
@@rubyboy99 I disagree with this personally but if you don't mind me asking, what would the criteria be? Would it be the poor, people with a low IQ, criminals, people without education, those with a disregard for the environment, the elderly, people who are infertile, people who are very fertile, the physically weak, the disabled, the mentally ill, those of a certain race or nationality? To cut out that chunk of the population you have to pick a few of these groups and honestly I wouldn't be able to bring myself to do it. Even if it were picked at random I think everyone should be allowed to live.
I hate to say it but humanity is too stupid to save itself. There are billions of individuals that want to do better, but as a species we just can't get our priorities straight
I'm so angry about climate change and have decided the best approach is to really show my anger at the situation via social commentary. then I can use CAPITALS TO SHOW THAT I'M MORE UPSET ABOUT IT THAN YOU...THEN ADDING EXCLAMATION MARKS TO EMPHASISE HOW ANGRY I AM!!!!!!!!!!!! Phew....that's me done my bit, what have YOU done?
I agree 100% but if they rejected Heathrow’s third runway, it would give our economy an even more suicidal future than it has already. Also planes are 3x as efficient as their road going counter parts, so an increase in air travel could improve our immersions.
Lol, guys just dont die. Just be human. Guys dont take it from me, live your lives. We have all met the germans, we all know the definition of ridiculous, just at least try not to go there.
Except natural climate change is a gradual change that allows animals to adapt. However, the climate is changing to fast to just be natural, meaning that animals can't adapt and survive fast enough.
Needed: A rational and doable approach to making our world a better place in which to live. “Nothing diminishes anxiety faster than action.” Search: ‘drawdown solutions’ OR ‘samslair blogspot drawdown solutions’
I could listen to Rachel Paris all day everyday and would still want more, she is awesome :)
Aamir
Try living with her, you'd soon be drinking too much!
she is funny but her voice is annoying
I liked her at first, but she brngs down the mood by picking on the guy way to much.
@@bigbear-lu1ez It's scripted and thus they plan it.
She's a really underrated comedian. Genuinely love her style of comedy
2:35 "If you want to stop uncontrolled immigration, you might want to prevent the southern hemisphere from becoming uninhabitable."
*I need this on T-shirts.*
Are you aware of the 21st century?
Printing T-shirts is a day to day occurrence and not only by child slave labour in china. Even you are possibly capable, I'm assuming you're not in a vegetative state and have the use of your limbs.
Or just keep making ....... comments.
@@distantcoff7391 lol who hurt you? I wanna send them flowers.
@@Danka42 which particular part was incorrect?
Preferably made in sweatshops in asia from material produced in south america and then sold all over the world , yes this will solve the issue of making the southern hemisphere more inhabitable ! Brilliant idea ! I bet you were the brightest in your class weren't you ?
Well now that explains the screenname.
@@kachi2782 oh my, you sure showed me! That's an A+ for reading with understanding for this bright mind. I am humbled by your superior intelligence.
I like Nish, but I only watch these clips if Rachel Parris is in them. She steals the show every time.
" When Nish isn't burning fridges in his back garden..." 🤣🤣🤣 dead
Am I allowed to laugh and cry at the same time.
?
Laughter is the best medicine, esp. in the face of scam like global warming.
Considering that Alarmist like you have no clue what real science is, its not surprising that sounds like sheep bleeping.
Yes. Yes, you are allowed to do both. It's a reasonable response.
Douglas Sawyer I find that I spend half my life doing just that these days...
So, I just discovered the Mash Report, this is only my second one viewed and I am officially in love with Rachel Parris. I normally hate these kind news satire of shows in America, but the British actually know how to do satire right, since they basically invented the art form.
soulofmiami yeah she’s great isn’t she, it’s that dry humour I really love
Pity that the show was just shot out of the sky by the Tories.
she needs to have her own show
Rachel can cut anyone down with just a noise or a word or a clap. It's amazing.
"Should we just give up on climate change? Yes."
--Oil and coal industries
Rachel has a way of making sarcasm so sarcastic
I wonder why this clip hasn't gone viral? Well done the BBC, for having the integrity not to be obvious and exploit the 'sex sells' ethos...and thanks Nish, for being in the thumbnail.
4:27 _Googles "windmilling"_
_Wishes he hadn't_
Did you not grow up as a boy? It was the 1st thing I learned how to do after walking.
Yes. I said WALKING!!!
I really want to become friends with Rachel. Her sarcasm level is so perfect, I am loving it!
When people say “female comedians aren’t funny”, I’m pretty sure it’s because they are looking for them on the wrong side of the pond.
I can't actually remember the last time anyone my age said that in person. It was probably over a decade ago. That's a good thing.
Oh nu, people said this? :(
What I took from this video is "don't let Gove go floppy, because if he does, he'll have a higher chance of surviving when someone - inevitably - pushes him out of a second floor window. And that will be the end of us".
In the End Times a good laugh helps. Thank you.
She should be hosting the show...
i only ever see her on youtube... SHE ISNT THE HOST?? WTF. who is the host?
The premise of the show is that Nish Kumar is the official host, but he just gets walked over by her for comedic value. She is the host for all intents and purposes.
@@bibtebo No, she comes on and does these five minute slots, Nish is the main face foe the rest of it.
@@garryburton36 funny, cos they only ever use her bit for the promos and clips i have seen, but fair enough.
@@bibtebo I've watched the show a few times, her stuff does tend to be the best, IMO.
The people saying its the fault of the companies need to realise by refusing to buy from those and consuming from green companies you can make a difference
It's not that easy. How do we get to work? We have to use gas
@@TCt83067695 Yes, you might have to use gas to get to work but how does that stop you from buying products from "greener" companies? You can still choose to stop buying from companies who contribute to pollution and support the companies who try to change and make a difference.
You can also choose to look at your lifestyle as a whole and try your best to cut down your carbon footprint. From using less electricity and water, avoiding food waste, buying less stuff you don't really need and trying to reduce your trash production - there are so many ways you can help! Just drinking one less cup of coffee a day is a start.
And when it comes to your daily commute, there are a number of things you can do:
- Make sure to check your tire pressure every month
- Remove any unneeded weight off your car
- Get your car serviced to make sure the engine is running efficiently
- Drive more economically
- Plan your trips and drive less (eg. shop in a store on your route home instead of making a second trip)
All of these things can save you a whole lot of gas in the long run (+ save you money), and drastically reduce your CO2 footprint.
It IS that easy, we all need to do our best and we need to stop making excuses.
@@lauragrubbe that wasnt what i asked.
Besides you've admited it's not possible to completely cut out those polluting companies like the op implied.
It wasnt excuse. It is just fact.
Your suggestions notwithstanding tho...
Also realize that those SAME COMPANIES create manipulative ad campaigns that attack your self-esteem, telling you to buy their worthless shit! Stop trying to give them an out they don't deserve.
First, often there is no green alternative. Second, usually the green alternative is more expensive and for people who don't have a lot of money that will be a problem. Third, most of those green companies are owned by bigger, non-green companies. So in the end you're giving them money anyways. The fault lies with the companies, not the consumers.
What do you mean should we give up on climate change? By all appearances we already have... 😒
@robert hicks Sure. There's always the idiots who almost kill us. Today it's antivaxxers, tomorrow it's gonna be you (you're more likely to be successful.) People didn't get brighter or more educated with the advent of the Internet unfortunately.
Its unfortunately true that no matter how much you show people the truth they are going to be willing to throw away the future to some scammer trying to eradicate poverty, and in the process line his or her own pocket. No matter how much you try to educate them to the truth, they have been programmed by liberal schools to accept the UN as some sort of "second coming" messiah.
Ann Nee
As always has been, t h u s always shall be..the planet(s) are at the mercy of that big blazing bright ball of hydrogen, The Sun.🎩
I'm not a climate denier, I believe the scientific consensus. However, unfair to rule out nuclear as a source of power because modern nuclear power is least damaging to the planet in terms of pollution and CO2. Yes, there is nuclear waste, but technologies are also being developed to recycle much of the modern nuclear waste as fuel again. The solution isn't renewables only, still need ability to meet base load surges.
MeTube i’d be inclined to agree mainly because nuclear stations produce much more electricity in comparison
True over the next 50-100 years nuclear energy would make an excellent stop-gap solution until we can make renewable energy more viable.
@@__-fm5qv Plus it will take decades to build the hydrogen processing and production plants to replace legacy fuels.
their timing between the two of them is brilliant!
Very genuinely expressed, you are so good.
She gets funnier the more she gets pissed at the real news. Nish might be one of my favorite "quick wit comedy" minds as well
Well now I feel safer knowing that Micheal Gove is in charge of saving Britain
Spot on. Beautiful.
I'm reasonably sure that Nish doesn't know all of Rachel's presentations ahead of time. If he does, he is fantastic at performing the facial expression known as amused disgust.
she is hilarious love her i laugh and cry at the same time
Rachel Parris!!!.. Absolutely hilarious 🤣..Poor Nish..😅
I came to the comments for the inevitable ignorant denier rage and anti science conspiracy theories. Not too bad, actually. 👍
Jonathan Pearce
Let's not forget that science is not the be all and end all of convenient or inconvenient truths. Governments and agencies have spun us all yarns in the past, and no doubt some are being spun today, yet even more are yarns being prepared to be spun henceforth in what we laughably refer to as "The Future"!
Personally, I find it difficult to put all my faith in anything that has a branch which indulges in animal experimentation! The bastards!!!
The problem is, that the real science does NOT support agw. Read REAL peer review magazines in science specific journals and you find that much of what pass the pal review magazine is bull.
As for conspiracy, its a long known fact that if you control information flow, you control people's opinion. In North Korea, for instance, people are told that NK is much larger than the US. IF you have ever seen a globe from NK, it shows that the majority of the world is in asia, and NK is the majority of asia. When people escape form NK, they are surprised at the size of the world. In China, ww2 was called the war of Japanese aggression and they are taught that China defeated the Japanese by themselves and it was the communist that did the majority of the fighting.
In agw, a tiny group of people control the data flow to the public and that is why people think that it is the majority that support it.
@@roberthicks1612 Here he is, Jonathan, right on cue.
I'm disappointed nobody made an EVERYBODY DO THE FLOP comment
Just sent this link to a mate with depression - If this doesn't make him smile, sod all will
This deadline has been moved back so many times.
NO. I don't think we should give up on changing the climate. I think we should continue to change the climate.
This is the only the second Rachael bit I've seen and I'm hooked! She's brilliant.
That said, the biggest problem in the UK is NIMBYism. Wind farms do pretty well and they'd do damn well in the UK where we have the weather to make use of them.
I'd stick wind turbines down the central reservations of every motorway for starters and/or hard shoulder verge and every turbine in the countryside could be painted camo.
Plus, all new buildings should have an outer skin of solar panels.
Also, upgrade all motorways with rails above the hard shoulder so freight that would normally be taken by lorry gets put onto the rails and automatically routed to hubs at the intended destination where lorries pick them up and take them the rest of the way. Millions of lorry miles evaporate.
Instead of replacing worn roads with new tarmac, replace them with surfaces with embedded induction loops which will increase the range of electric vehicles because they're constantly getting trickle charged.
Add hydroelectricity and anything I've forgotten and you're done.
Why have I just found Rachel Paris literally binge watching her shows
The real shame of it is: "There's NO point in the UK even trying to address climate change ". We are far too small a player and ANYTHING we do is utterly swallowed up by the largest polluters of the planet - the USA, China and Russia. Until there is a worldwide consensus and agreement, there's no value in the UK crippling our own industries and throwing away our own employment prospects. I once believed fully in the "save the world" mantra, but after 25 years of doing my best in the face of absolute worldwide apathy - I GIVE UP!
Wonderful👍🏻
I just love her!!!
Is there anyone here who slightly admits that given the actual homosapiens attitude, generally speaking, is pretty much impossible to slow the climate change and diminish the effects? We consume too much of everything in a very convenient way to us. We were taught to consume for our convenience and for sellers profits. We're to many (7.7 bln) and old habits die hard.
If they were serious about fixing the "problem," the solutions would be top-down...not forced upon end users and consumers. The ones most capable of doing something are given a pass. Alternative energy won't work. Solar has limited locales where it works well. Wind is crazy expensive and has negative environmental impacts to build, maintain and operate. Nuclear is the best option, but people are opposed to it...even as we find ways to use nuclear waste to generate power.
Nish is my favorite, he catches so many grenades
While industry churns out billions of tons of pollutants, I will counteract the effects with my bag for life and my special lightbulb.
Why can't she be PM? Or at least give her her own show.
oh my glob- just found the new background for my phone
Don't give up. Just be honest about it.
1:55 ...Or that God-forsakenly-awful movie, Waterworld...
fun for the whole family indeed.
One year closer to the dystopian hellmouth.
Plant Earth is billions of years old. Humans evolved yesterday and won’t be around for too much longer. The question should be: do you want a fast extinction or a slow extinction? The outcome will be the same.
Ten years left.... Seems about right
I luv this woman!!!
Lit!!! Love it.
Wonderful!
But Hinkley is a Nuclear power station. It is actually good for the environment seen as nuclear energy is a clean alternative to fossil fuels. So I don't get why she needed to make fun of it.
What happened with the global “apagones” you know? That for about ten minutes we would all turn off every light off?? Does that not help?
Net Average Temperatures dropping worldwide since 2014, Grand Solar Minimum is starting as predicted and cold is expected to be similar to Maunder Minimum. Thames River in England should be freezing again as in 1665.
@10 years ago a CO2 study (UVA, VA) showed 410 ppm CO2 on West coast monitors and 330ppm on East coast. USA is a 80ppm per westerly wind passage CO2 sink. US/Canada & Mexico remove about 400 ppm CO2 from Northern Hemisphere each growing season.
utter nonsense. mauder minimum will not have any discernible effect.
Angus Hulme - Maunder Minimum (1645-1715) already happened and millions died of famine. Try History, you might be surprised.
@@paulgus73 do you REALLY think I don't know this. the weakness of the denier arguments just doesn't warrant response so I won't. the answer is NO we are not going to be saved by a mini ice age in the next 15 years... and besides this is a side issue. nobody is arguing that CO2 is the only factor in global temps... solar irradiance is the major one undoubtedly. that does not change the fact that the greenhouse effect we have created has dire probable consequences. god I hope that a mauder minimum buys us time to resolve but everything I have read (with one exception) states that the forecast models take the MM in to account and whilst there is some cooling associated with, it is not going to reverse the trend. indeed I do believe we should have been in the cooling cycle since the early 2000s or maybe 2008... I don't remember which.
@@paulgus73 Abe - sorry if I was a little rude. I would really love you to be right! ...but from what I have read this has already been taken in to account in projections.
We're all going to die but many will be really well dressed and driving spiffy cars when we do.
The Shadow Yes please! 😉
Humour provides good delivery but without a final moment of dead pan fails to deliver. She should have wrapped this gag up by simply staring into the camera starkly after the 'fucking it' line, because truly it is stark now, would have made more of an impact less performance oriented
I had to look up 'windmilling'
Shocked
How. How on earth did they cancel this show????
Soz Rachel, I missed that, was that NUNDREDS or hun dreds
Ok, I don't get it, sorry.
What's the second meaning of windmilling?
When a guy spins his dick around by shaking his hips. We've all done it...
Yes.
the irony is plan for it or scramble it makes no differance to the destination,
Dayum! The sass! The shade! The speed!
Does my dairy intolerance help in any way?
I have no scientific proof but probably yes? Well done, your gut
Angus Hulme - All of the models and projections examined by scientists use a steady state Sun light only spectrum as the only Solar source output.
All neglect or ignore planetary contributions to the Sun's motion about the Center of Mass of the system. All of them refuse to model Earth Magnetosphere changes, Solar flares, Solar Magnetite flux coupling conditions and cyclic output of solar cycles.
None include the 11-13 year primary, 172 year minor planetary coupling, 515 year planetary alignment coupling and the 1030 year major planetary coupling cycles.
If you would like some primary sources, I can give you some advice. I don't deny climate change, I study it using Solar Physics and Planetary Science. I've not just studied Solar Physics but taught it at the college level.
The potential minor contribution of trace gases pales to statistical insignificance in the face of massive changes in Solar output during a major cycle minimum event.
We are facing just such an event.
Thank you for your polite discourse, Angus.
Best wish for the holidays.
Doc
Abe De And here is yet another random UA-camr claiming they know better than all the leading scientists in the field...
Go warming go! I'm in favor of as much as we can get, ASAP!!
If the world is still here in ten years I guess we're all going to look very stupid.
The world will be fine; it's the human race that is fucked. We'll live, but our potential will be crippled.
take population down to 4billion (without damaging mother earth) and your problem is sorted for the next 130 years.
Are you volunteering for bio-deactivation?
An Account if I was presented a button that would make the above happen, the people would feel no pain, they wouldn't know what happened or what was, but the catch is I would always be one of those people, I would press the button for the sake of humanity.. :/ unfortunately not gonna happen, everyone go green?
@@anaccount8474 lets play a game.
@@rubyboy99 I disagree with this personally but if you don't mind me asking, what would the criteria be? Would it be the poor, people with a low IQ, criminals, people without education, those with a disregard for the environment, the elderly, people who are infertile, people who are very fertile, the physically weak, the disabled, the mentally ill, those of a certain race or nationality?
To cut out that chunk of the population you have to pick a few of these groups and honestly I wouldn't be able to bring myself to do it. Even if it were picked at random I think everyone should be allowed to live.
Thanks Thanos.
I LOVE her.
I hate to say it but humanity is too stupid to save itself. There are billions of individuals that want to do better, but as a species we just can't get our priorities straight
10 years left. Anything changed?
God, people laugh at anything.
I'm so angry about climate change and have decided the best approach is to really show my anger at the situation via social commentary. then I can use CAPITALS TO SHOW THAT I'M MORE UPSET ABOUT IT THAN YOU...THEN ADDING EXCLAMATION MARKS TO EMPHASISE HOW ANGRY I AM!!!!!!!!!!!! Phew....that's me done my bit, what have YOU done?
We're all gonna die but before we do: am I the only one who thinks Nish is super in love with Rachel and is not very good at hiding it?
They do a solid job
Forget it
I'm tempted to go floppy
I could never go floppy for Rachel.
Rachel for PM
I'm a fan
2.40 Mike drop
Bullocks to the planet. I've gone floppy.
Nish always looks completely done in mash report
Why should the rich and powerful care? They'll have built their own Elysium by 2050. You'll see...
How so? Space exploration is under funded as hell.
Yes, a Polar Bear will feel like a surfer in a wetsuit in a hot tub.
Bring back Thanos!!!!
I agree 100% but if they rejected Heathrow’s third runway, it would give our economy an even more suicidal future than it has already. Also planes are 3x as efficient as their road going counter parts, so an increase in air travel could improve our immersions.
You fly to work???
Lol, guys just dont die. Just be human. Guys dont take it from me, live your lives. We have all met the germans, we all know the definition of ridiculous, just at least try not to go there.
I didn’t know BBC had “funny news”!!!
Give up? I've never been bothered about it. The climate changes naturally. Nothing we can do about it. Adapt and move
Except natural climate change is a gradual change that allows animals to adapt.
However, the climate is changing to fast to just be natural, meaning that animals can't adapt and survive fast enough.
is that the guy from prison break
Needed: A rational and doable approach to making our world a better place in which to live.
“Nothing diminishes anxiety faster than action.”
Search:
‘drawdown solutions’
OR
‘samslair blogspot drawdown solutions’
Now the BBC have removed the Mash Report from the orders of the Government , so much for impartiality
@Gary Brentford why are you watching this video then ?
Honestly it's the rich and high class people that are making the most carbon emissions
@Gary Brentford idk what you're on about but I don't like the left or right or the b/w
Hey, look, yet another satirical news show. What are we at now? 20+?
And that’s a problem why?
She's like a British, cutier, and likable/adorable / non-morally-repugnant version of Kellyanne Conway.
no
Stop flying then preech
Fake news, it wasn’t scientists that caused the disaster at Jurassic Park.
Nish could start by not flying around the world a dozen times a year on tour. Sorry Nish.