James O'Brien schools caller who says climate change isn't man-made
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 січ 2020
- When this caller told James O'Brien that he didn't believe climate change was man-made, James O'Brien asked him for proof. Surely he could give one piece of evidence to back himself up.
#JamesOBrien #ClimateChange #LBC
LBC is the home of live debate around news and current affairs. We let you join the conversation and hold politicians to account.
Subscribe for more: l-bc.co/subscribe
Watch More Here:
The Latest Brexit Videos: l-bc.co/BrexitLatest
The Best Of The Nigel Farage Show: l-bc.co/Nigel
The Best Of James O’Brien: l-bc.co/JamesObrien
The Best Of Iain Dale: l-bc.co/IainDale
The Latest Donald Trump Videos: l-bc.co/DonaldTrump
Join in the conversation and listen at www.lbc.co.uk/
Sign up to LBC’s weekly newsletter here: l-bc.co/newsletter
Like, follow and subscribe to LBC!
Website: lbc.co.uk
Facebook: lbc
Twitter: / lbc
Instagram: / lbc
The fact that we are STILL having to have THIS argument with people tells me we will never solve climate change in time
Carl Sagan gave one of the most brilliant monologues on Climate Change ever back in the 1980’s. They didn’t do anything then, they won’t do anything now. There’s a lot of people on this planet that care about Climate Change. But there’s far more many that simply don’t care enough.
@@TylerG13 Because it cuts into their profits.
I think we may already need to change "...we will never solve...in time" to "we didn't solve...in time".
agreed!
@@darnelldyson4590 I think it's more up to industry than the majority of people. Unless we revolt!
I'm ashamed to say I held some of the beliefs this bloke has, I had to pause this video and read a few journals and watch some videos online. I've got a slightly better understanding of climate change now and planning on reading more detailed articles about it.
Do you think the lack of information was the only reason? Glad you changed your mind.
There is nothing wrong with ignorance as long as it's not willful ignorance. As long as you find new evidence and change your opinion based on that evidence then there is nothing to be ashamed of.
I respect you greatly for saying that. So few of us change our minds.
It's two months since you wrote that but wanted to tell you I've got big respect to you for genuinely "doing the research".
The greatest thing about finding out you're wrong is that you don't have to be wrong anymore.
It might seem unfair for James to keep asking where the caller got his info from, but when discussing science, it is standard protocol to site your sources or be able to if asked. James was quite generous and only asked for a name of a scientist.
My dad was a research scientist, and I've seen him and his work colleges at lunch time discuss work and quote paper titles and authors off the top of their head. You want to talk science, you have to talk like scientists do.
Yes, all true, except it's ^cite not ^site.
I don't agree that it's necessary for the layperson to be able to cite the names of scientists to still hold a true and reasonable belief.
To be sure, man-made climate change is objectively true. It is reasonable and correct for me to believe that, however, I can't name a scientist or seminal paper that supports my belief. Not because they don't exist, but just because my mind is occupied by other things.
This caller believes something that is false, but his inability to name a scientist does not disprove his belief.
@@DarkHelmet1976 "It is reasonable and correct for me to believe that, however, I can't name a scientist or seminal paper that supports my belief. Not because they don't exist, but just because my mind is occupied by other things."
Which is fine, but you are not denying decades of research and a mountain of published papers. This person thinks that body of evidence is wrong, so much so that they go on the radio and express their certainty. Despite having such confidence they still haven't bothered to read research, pointing at vague blogs as their fount of knowledge.
There is no need to disprove his belief it should be ignored and dismissed. Just like if someone claims drink driving improves safety and should not be regulated against.
Ok then Steven Koonin should ring a bell.
@@DarkHelmet1976
True, but it is a reasonable expectation that the caller should come prepared.
If he went to the effort to call the media to express an opinion knowing that his opinions will be questioned, it boggles the mind that he wouldn't at least do a little preparation.
I'm guessing the caller is used to spouting out his opinions and have no one question them.
Such individuals decide how they feel about a subject and then seek evidence to confirm that view even where it does not exist.
That's called confirmation bias
@@ericrivera8410 Beat me to it 😂
you're being overly generous. I think most can't even be bothered to go cherry picking; it's comforting enough to "be" right, and as long as they don't go looking for confirmation, they won't bump into any reality
Dunning-Kruger Effect. In order to appreciate your true level of ignorance about a subject, you must know quite a lot about the subject. So the expert tends underestimates his knowledge and the fool is certain he knows all that he needs to know.
That Galileo comment was brutal. 🙊
Stunned by the many negative comments here. O'Brien is correct to ask, "how do you know what you know?" This is the only question that matters. And if it is asked patiently enough and frequently enough will, in my experience, cause most of the people who are in denial of human-caused climate change to begin to question the unjustified certainty that has crept into their thinking.
We run a cattle farm in Gippsland. Our farm is blanketed in thick smoke many days each week, our state and much of the southern and eastern parts of the country are on fire. Much about theses fires is unprecedented.
It's fascinating to see that the only section of the conservative community in this country that has broadly speaking changed it's mind on climate change is the agricultural community. Farmers know weather, we live and breath it. The changes we see are real, they are persistent and they are emphatically putting more heat energy into the weather systems.
It is fascinating how people who lived in this world only a few years can judge that changes they experience are extreme while the historical facts are very different.
@@mmc5005dam your grammar is so bad. I don’t know if you anti climate or for it lol😂
But assuming your grammar is bad. I will say you are a climate denier lol😂
@@mmc5005 By using geological sampling, dating, looking at a range of natural features, statistical analysis and carbon-dating in conjunction with sampling to look at historical changes in climate, and comparing it to the rapid acceleration the world has experienced, especially since the industrial revolution, you _can_ compare today's climate and it's acceleration, in tandem with human activity (that drives it and accelerates it) to our climate historically, and going back a lot further than you mate care to admit.
Ask me how I know? I'll give you a clue, my mail arrives with the word Dr, instead of Mr.
(Department of Natural Sciences, University of Warwick).
I'm with you James. I can't understand why people can contradict themselves in the same sentence and have no clue that they are doing it and nothing you say has any effect on them. It's beyond frustrating.
I like it when (i really dont) you ask them a question and they answer a completely different question you never asked.
Because they're talking from emotion, not from any science or fact. They feel like they don't want this to be true, so they are arguing from that perspective. That is why they're thousands of sayings about not bothering to argue with a fool or idiot.
Because the kind of people who call into these programmes are hardly the nation’s finest minds
I was told in Elementary School science class that if humans don't make some drastic changes it will be too late to save the planet in about 50 years. That's was 32 years ago. And I have seen almost every thing he said was going to happen.
@@JamesSmith-1036 looks like we will wipe ourselves out before then
The callers tend to be totally unprepared. Thats how most bullshitters are. All talk no evidence.
People like him don't research to find facts, they 'research' to find confirmation bias....
BLOGS! You'll never need a peer reviewed scientific journal again! (And grapes)
I Love this guy...
He destroys the arguments of such people with such ease. Either he asks them to explain words they use but don't understand, or he asks basic questions about their sources.
Simple but brilliant...
@@83piwo Simply, brilliant, and also in any decent textbook about climate or environmental history. The problem isn't with the statement about the Thames freezing or growing grapes in England - that's only part of the information - its that the caller couldn't justify his statements or give specific sources. Neither could I off the top of my head, but give me a few minutes to get my Uni books .... .
its amazing how many people are so sure in their beliefs but crumple at the first critical questions. its like watching their brains trying to start like a car with a dead battery
The caller would seem to be suffering from the Dunning Kruger effect.
Seems to be?
If climate change was real hen the world should have ended by now
you can't just go around expecting people to make sense! That's MADNESS!
Climate change is a natural phenomenon , the problem is that the climate should be cooling but because of human action the climate is continuing to warm.
I like how you can explain it, and I can agree with that now that we know that we can help make things better.
the climate has changed throughout history, we've had warming periods and cooling periods when there was no mass industry, at some point the climate will dramatically change, we as humans have no way of effecting it, thats life, we live, we die, we're floating around on a rock in the middle of nowhere.
Roughcovers - you are spot on 👏🏻👍🏻
David Ward - where is your proof of that though? If it’s constantly changed throughout time, what proof do you have to blame it on human activity now? Your point makes no sense!
David Ward - Well it obvious... because the climate has changed throughout time, before humans existed...
Do you believe or think that the climate forever stayed the same before mankind? Honestly? If not then there’s your answer 👍🏻
David Ward why ask for evidence to debunk your argument when you have not provided any evidence.
Let’s just stick to facts and evidence.
Let’s be honest, we can call for “the facts and evidence” all day, but there is so much to each side of the argument that you can counter each other. No matter what, some will blame humanity and some will say it’s natural earth cycles and no amount of argument will change those opinions.
How can you school fact 😂 the point is there is no repeatable scientific test that co2 impacts climate , also weather and climate are totally different things
Yes there is. CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Greenhouse gases produce higher temperature by letting pass light and blocking heat radiation. A very simple physical phenomenon.
angry brit We have known for well over a hundred years that CO2 is a greenhouse gas.
@@peterhausmann8337 No, greenhouse gasses TRAP the heat from the sun and reflect the light. Producing a greenhouse affect.
A very simple physical phenomenon. (If it blocked the radiation that would mean the greenhouse gas affect is non existent)
@@peterhausmann8337 that's funny because ice coredrillings has proven that the planets temperature has no coloration to C02 as C02 was the prodominatly the main gas in the earth atmosphere during the last 4 ice agers
@pneumatictrousers Slight edit. 😂
James failed to quote 1 one single scientist and failed to name them. Irony.
Jeremy Corbyn's brother is a scientist that denies man-made climate change.
Because there is no consensus on climate change. James thinks he is an expert yet had no facts, just a narrative
@@LH-nd9qg I'd be ashamed to have this video up with this title without quoting and naming a single scientist myself, the audacity of the man is astounding.
He might be a scientist but he has no qualifications in climate science or environmental science. Also James didn't need to quote anyone as it's a mainstream view that man made climate change is a fact. If you're going to go against mainstream science you need to have facts to support it and reference where you get those facts from.
@@sibience James couldn't quote a single scientist because he doesn't know what he's on about, and your claims regarding mainstream views are not mainstream at all. It's all questionable.
@@sibienceSomeone's going to have to break it to James and sibience here that Greta isn't a Scientist, she's a disabled kid that should've spent more time educating herself on the facts.
I think JOB's close to a breakdown
.....let's hope so!
He's been in a breakdown all his life
pls
@Julian Diaz Where can we find such a individual because surely your not talking about the lunatic obrien.
What's the matter ...facts upsetting you ?
This happens to me all the time.
Guy: The world isn’t round
Me: so you know better then scientists?
Guy: I never said that but *blah*
Me: but you said something that directly contradicts what science tells us, how is that you not saying scientists are wrong?
Me: because I never actually said it
Is this some kind of verbal privilege?
They like to say the scientists are lying to cover up the truth.
Technically it’s Spherical.
@@kalijasin Technically it's an oblate spheroid.
@@robbrandhoff3 The best one is when they say if it was a sphere then surely it should be slightly fatter in the middle because it's spinning, thinking they have you owned... it erm... is.
Bloke down the pub V science 😬😭
I'm not a fan of James O'Brian but he's absolutely right. If you're going to argue against the 98%+ scientific consensus, you better be prepared.
@pneumatictrousers where? What's your source?
I believe around 80% of climate scientists support the idea that climate change is man made.
@@patbateman2088 Let's see Paul Allen's data.
Same here.
How can you not be a fan?
Piers Corbyn.
Yep jeremys brother, the only sensible corbyn
Dr Phil Mason aka Thunderf00t has a great video on this
@@verbantermainia1937 thank you , il have a look at that
Piers Corbyn is a fruit loop conspiracy theorist who has no respect for the truth. He is about as far from being a scientist as is humanly possible.
@@widebody123 don't you mean Jeremy his brother....
James is a spoon.
Edgy.
Any right wingers or brexiters got any argument against James here?
952 dislike?
952 people who don't believe in global warming
Nope 900+ people who understood that O'Brien had no idea what the caller was talking about and got wound up unnecessarily with a guy that was making a parallel point to his own.
NO, It’s not that 952 people don’t believe in global warming, the discussion was that mankind was causing global warming.
Did the people living in Doggerland (6500 BC) cause the global warming that submerged their lands and cut off Britain from Europe?
An early Brexit!!!
I've had this exact same argument several times it's very interesting.
The planet has gone through many climate changes,
(real scientists know that the planet has experienced at least 5 different ice ages, and that means that it was hotter in between them, or it would’ve been just one ice age, and people were not around back then)
and the last one started to retreat 10,000 years ago, which is long before humans were able to be the cause……..
And while these cycles are natural, our industrial activity is definitely speeding things up, which is why we should be able to do something to slow it back down……….
I believe the argument against climate change being a natural cycle is that earth is supposed to be cooling at this stage. Citation Needed.
@@jackmcdonald6424. Considering the fact that the planet has been warming up for the last ten thousand years or so, I am unable to understand where you could have got the idea that the planet would be getting cooler now………….
Especially when every scientist who is involved with looking at the ice sheets and glaciers have been saying since the late seventies-ish, that the planet is getting hotter, and that it’s human activity that is speeding up this process………..
So instead of incredibly and lamely putting, “citation needed “ at the end of your ridiculous comment, please explain where you got this idiotic idea(which scientists have said this) of us supposedly heading into a cooling period..!..!..!..
The IPCCs assessment on global temperature as caused by natural cycles with and without human influence showed that without human influence global temperatures would be dropping right now. I’m not a climate denier my man just wanted make you aware earth heating naturally had a counter argument. In regards to the 10,000 years that heating is not linear, it peaks and troughs on its way up. We should be troughing (not a word).
Be well
@@jackmcdonald6424.
I am sorry that I have not replied earlier, but I have just seen your reply, firstly, I was never suggesting that you were a climate denier(just as I wasn’t suggesting that you are a flat earther, because if I thought that you were, I would just say it outright, and not suggest it), I was just saying, that this idea that anyone could possibly or actually know what is supposed to be happening to our climate(or weather, for longer than a month or so), is totally and utterly ridiculous…………….
Because the idea of the planet being at a point of supposed cooling down, “right now”, is obviously just as laughable as it a foolish notion, as it’s not possible, that anyone can prove it, because as you have said(and therefore you should already understand) the cycles of heating up and cooling down, are not smooth cycles………. And it’s because they spike, and fall, in varied and unpredictable proportions,(which is dependent upon lots of different causes, such as volcanoes blocking the sunlight which is a big cause of heat), and therefore this truly means, that it’s not humanly or scientifically possible, to predict these fluctuations, or how they are supposed to be fluctuating………
Therefore, as it is not scientifically possible, to honestly/truthfully say accurately, wether we should naturally be cooling down, or heating up, “right now”, then anyone who claims that they know what is supposed to be happening with the climate/weather “right now”, is writing a cheque that they are unable to cash, and that is all that I was/am saying about your comment……..
Stay safe and informed, as well as think about all claims critically…………
:-)
We have excellent data and models to understand past climate change. The current warming is opposite to the predictions based on the models that have worked for all past climate change. Once human impact is added to the same models, they perfectly replicate what is being measured. The current change is human caused.
O'Brien's tactic is you give me specific times, dates and sources for your opinions while he sits in front of a computer with links to people who manipulate the data in favour of his opinion! He's a dunce!!
So James is on camera doing this and a caller who isn't can't?
Your guy was embarrassed, you have nothing
So why doesn't the person that is about to call in not first look up the science that supports their claims. Then at least they don't look like an utterly confused idiot.
It's no surprise he is going to ask these questions. The dunce is the caller that didn't prepare.
Wow that was painful
What's the worst that can happen?
We hand over excessive power to the state and live under authoritarian rule with a crashed economy.
“Only superseded by better science.” Just brilliant 😁. Love the way James deconstructed this callers argument!
We still grow grapes. There a vineyard down the road from me.
More thumbs down than up!? This is the problem with the lack of reasoning these days...
Does anyone like James O’Brien
NO 🤗
James o' nofriends
Doubt it. He doesn't even like himself 🤣
His mum
Yes, I find him hilarious...😁
Someone Should teach that guy when Man-made Greenhouse Gases get trapped in the atmosphere it's causes the earth to heat up thus causes The Polar Ice caps to melt, thus causing Sea Levels to rise, thus making more power weather that effects the planet in ways it didn't. Basic Science.
Hey, we've only known co2 was a greenhouse gas since 1896 - some people need time to catch up with that sort of cutting-edge discovery.
Sadly, this is the way the majority of people debate most topics - with zero fcking expertise.
Brilliant conversation. I am a true fan of your logic. Great show!
Its more 70% natural 30% man made.
Yep nobody is denying that mankind has not had an impact ...👍
@@Ballbaggins all we have done is accelerate what was going to happen regardless. So instead of 1000 years its 100
Yeah, venus cloud cities here we come.
Any reasonable scientist would say its barely even 1%
8 out of 10 scientists would agree with the caller but they'd lose their funding if they did.
Nonsense.
My a fruitcake?
Idiot
This guy just goes round and round with his own contradictions.
What's worse is that he doesn't know that he's contradicting himself.
A lot of people are like that caller and not just on climate change
There is no climate emergency, say 500 experts in letter to the United Nations..
97% of climate scientists in the entire world would easily refute anything these people say
Hugh Jass the 97% claim is pure BS.
...which changes nothing
DrumMan980 factual theory. Facts can never be a theory 🤦🏽♂️
@@givemeusernameplease6201 no 97% of scientists agree to the question that an increase in carbon would increase temperatures. They did not agree on the reason for any increase, the magnitude of related temp increases or that human activity is responsibility.
Their are scientists who hold a different viewpoint but this is never published. Hate O’Brien
@David Ward The same thing that caused past warming trends. Our ☀. As well as our orbital patterns and ocean currents, radiation from space, air currents and many other influences.
its never published because their findings fail to pass the scientific standard of peer review. That means its wrong
Name one and give me a sample of their study.
@@NC-ck5oj Peer review is a flawed process. It's like the communists reviewing non communist papers. The IPCC is also not a scientific institution it is a political institution set up with the goal of proving man made climate change. It's funding depends on proving that goal. By any means necessary so they don't lose their funding. Many credible scientists have had their papers rejected by the IPCC because they don't follow the CO2 causes climate change narrative. It's all a giant hoax.
I have just posted same as I am a Scientist.
"Believe in the holy science, infidel."
Man Made Climate Change is Real.
@@hukyeh2715 You forgot the quotation marks!
@@user-ti2rg2mq6z CO2 is on the rise due to emissions.
@@jurissui7238 Define what you mean by "rise"
@@jurissui7238 CO2 is food for trees and all plant life - win/win
"Don't look up" comes to mind, if you don't acknowledge an issue it doesn't 'exist'
How do you manage to have an endless stream of these types of drips phoning in?!?!
This confuses me the most because I only see James on youtube clips, the callers must listen to the show and surely know exactly what James will put back to them…
Selective scientists James. This isn't a schooling.
This caller is convinced he's right, although he hasn't got a clue why 🤔 He doesn't KNOW why he's right, he's just convinced he is. There is no hope for humanity or the environment until self-righteous and paranoid people like this learn to trust those that know more and can back up their argument with scientific fact
Climate change is a natural phenomenon.. it's constantly in flux. The issue is that human endeavour is pushing climate change to new extremes.
Amazing how the science-illiterates think it's a proper 'gotcha' moment when they say the climate has always changed - a classic case of ignorance compounded by arrogance. They seem to genuinely believe that tens of thousands of experts across umpteen fields of science have collectively failed to take that into consideration.
Whatever the subject is, this is the kind of questioning we need to hear when journalists are speaking with people who have some measure of power. Make people justify their beliefs by identifying the source(s) of their beliefs.
Classic "so you're saying" moment there.
TONY HAWK - Agreed! O'Brien, Newman and their ilk are nothing more than leftist mouthpieces and shills paid exorbitant amounts to propagandise for those who do not have the ordinary, working man's interests at heart! Oops, shouldn't have gendered my comment perhaps; naughty me!!!
I love how the right denies science and uses cherrypicked data to try and disprove Man-Made Climate Change.
@@hukyeh2715 Go home.
@@hukyeh2715 Wrong thread.
@@hukyeh2715 - 'Science'!!!🤣🤣🤣 Why don't you provide us with a few examples of your 'cherry-picked data', but let's face it, you can't!!
I’m from the US and have just stumbled upon James recently. I enjoy the conversations, and the straight forward approach to most issues of the disagreements that I’ve seen this far. Bravo, mate. 👏
He denies that humans create climate change yet still manages to blame rhe foreigners for doing it 😅😅
"I'm not going to patronise you by asking you what your qualifications are..." pretty patronising to be fair
No it would PATRONIZING to ask him. Which he didn’t.
Why is it patronising to ask someone what their proof of an assertion is?
The Ajdam "pretty patronising to be fair" - Why do you believe that's the case?
...James is the one running LBC’s channel, isn’t he?
Only he would think he was capable of “schooling” anyone.
Hahaha
This is the proper way to deal with these obscurantists. Be rude, don't give ground to their stupidity; and it's time to question whatever is allowing them to spread their ignorance.
We must remember that no do long ago in the 1970s climate scientists predicted an iceage by the end of the century.
He started out by saying; "Mankind are not helping the matter" YOU pushed him into a corner as you ALWAYS do by bullying people into YOUR ideas and twisting their words. You really are a sad character. Let people TALK!! You don't know better. Brexit should tell you that. The downvotes SHOULD make you listen at least.
We were meant to be, theoretically going deeper into an iceage
Also the Thames froze over because of the biggest volcanic eruption recent history.
"I dO mY oWn rEseArcH!?"
Just popped in to give a thumbs down.
Seeya later.
Me too
have a thumbs up for your thumbs down... :)
Me too o'brien & davidson get the auto thumbs down & then off...RAPID
Too afraid to face your ignorance and realize that man-made climate change exists.
@@hukyeh2715 too afraid to admit your gullible....lol.
It may be hot in Australia, but we must remember what Australia is. Firstly, 18% of Australia is desert. Secondly, 35% of Australia receives very little rainfall. Thirdly, 70% of Australia's climate is classified as arid or semi-arid, which means that it receives less than 500mm of rain a year. And lets not forget about the fireworks in Australia, which are directly contributing to the bush fires. Scientists whom support this mans argument are Valentina Zharcova and Piers Corbyn. We mustn't look at just one place in the world (a continent, which Australia is!) but other places. Should we ignore the fact that much of the year in the UK, had temperatures below average. What about Turkey with record amounts of snow, as well Lebanon. None of this is in the media, except heat, just so globalists can push their agenda.
Plenty on Joe rogan
Where do you get your information from?
Properly, climate change is natural, and cyclical. What unequivocally IS man-made is the deviation from the normal cycles. We know this is the case, because we know what causes the cycles and how long they last. Collectively, they're known as Milankovitch Cycles, and they're made up of several cyclical influences lasting from tens of thousands of years to hundreds of thousands of years, and they're entirely predictable. The current warming trend is well outside these cycles and is measured on the scale of mere decades. we even know what's causing it, namely the concentration of hydrocarbons in the atmosphere because of their ability to absorb energy due to the way the distribution of electrical charge can vary in them..
Cyclical climate change is natural, the current trend in the change of the climate (global warming) is man made.
The hypocrite drives a car to work....... 🚶🏃🚵 SAVE THE PLANET
Transportation is 25%, heating and electricity is 60% CO2 emissions !
Bad Russian trolls on this comment section
If everyone agreed that we are responsible for climate change, then perhaps we would spend more time trying to resolve it. Until we all take responsibility and work together, nothing will change. People that reject science in this manner simply don't want to hear the truth or take responsibility. They don't want to resolve it, and so avoid doing so by pointing blame elsewhere.
Considering what is being asked for humans to do has very little “bad outcomes worse than not addressing it
A group of scientists who are not climate scientists say its getting warmer.
What is wrong with this picture?
David Ward there is no such a thing as a climate scientist
@David Ward It is true i'm afraid
James in a word - condescending
Julian Diaz no... because he’s condescending.
@@86Rikki Condescending but right.
An asteroid hitting the Earth wouldn't be due to human action, be we would still need to do something about it. Same goes for Climate change.
Also, the people saying it need to be a global effort are basically saying either "other people need to something about it" or "No, you first".
The wind changed and his face stuck... The transformation to being a grumpy old man is complete
Speaking of frozen faces. How’s that Botox working for you love. You’re way too old and plastic looking to try and fool people that it’s natural.
what's leaving the eu got to do with the theory of global warming??
He's comparing the complete lack of evidence both climate change deniers and brexit voters have for there arguments. How can you not understand that?
@FreeSpeech "the world is going to end because Brexit and the Tories.." - Nah, mate... Just the UK will. (It's already happening...) The world will be fine.
Try Pieres Corbin first James.... Have a look at what he says!!
He says "It's the sun"
Newsflash, it's not the sun.
''Pieres Corbin''
Who?
The caller got scientific info from a blog. That's not how scientists work. It's to the point now, that when I hear someone say they've "done their own research", my eyes roll so far back into my head that I worry they may never face forward again.
Actually, they do keep blogs. They are usually internal to the scientific community, such as limited to their own institution/ research team, but they write about what they're up to, particular methods and any results. We public almost never have access, and even if we did we wouldn't understand more than the first half of the first sentence, mind.
@@PianoKwanMan Of course, but I think you know what I mean, though. It's not a public publishing site.
Why would you go on national radio and talk about something that you know nothing about? It's mind boggling.
Its just fear of the truth. No one wants to admit they’ve caused something bad. And no one wants to be pointed at and told they’re the problem. (especially the older generation).
It is also frustrating that everyday people get blamed for everything wrong, eg climate change. Everyday people just live their lives as best they can, if thats causing damage the people in charge need to push for change. Generally given an example of things we can change, we change them. Re usable bags, paper straws, shopping local.
a big part is the money, oil profits vs planet survival...
The scientists! Which scientists is he talking about, one sided story.
All of them. The whole point of science is we don’t have to rely on the unreliable nature of ‘stories’
@@matthewvaughan8192 that's simply not true, there are many well known scientists who disagree with the ipcc who pick and choose which studies or data to make there case.
If any were able to answer a single question as it is asked then there also wouldn't be any religions.
People could skate on the Thames because there was a tiny little sort of Global cooling caused by the dust cloud which came out of Krakatoa when it decided to explode.
Thank you James. People need to wake up.
James, "Scientists says it is (man-made)" No, they don't. There is no universal consensus on Climate Change.
So, right away, you are attempting to misrepresent opinion with fact.
There is absolute scientific consensus about humans affecting the climate, making it less stable and more unpredictable. No other subject has had more papers published and reviewed. Its literally physics that we understand for more than 100 years.
@@boukmann1791 look into what happened to ie David Bellamy (rip) to get a glimpse into what not to say to get funded. science that forbids scepticism is not science, its religious dogma.
@@whowhy9108 Your first point is valid, science does have this problem, but I am not sure it applies to the scale of climate change research. I agree with your second point too, but questioning scientific facts without a proper procedure is what I would call dogmatic, because it destroys any basic understanding of a subject (which at basic level is most likely correct) in order to subscribe to this growing culture of 'I have enough of experts telling me what to do'
@@boukmann1791 There is nothing more anti-scientific than the very idea that science is settled, static, impervious to challenge.
"Unlike religious believers, scientists always have a voice whispering in their ear: “remember, you might be wrong.” and youre telling us, except when it comes to climate?
@@whowhy9108 I never said climate change is settled. I said its the current scientific consensus that we are having an impact on the climate and, considering how fragile we are, it should be taken extremely serious.
Climate science is open for challenge like any other field, but there is not a single credible scientist that will refute the basics of what climate science has found, because its solid knowledge. Do you not think there would be a queue of scientists trying to find gaps in existing predictions?
What you seem to be asking is to question scientific process in climate science without proper procedure, throwing away previous knowledge completely, for the sake of 'questining science'. This is not how scientific skepticism is done. Newtonian gravity got us very far, but it was not as precise, nor did it explain everything, as Relativity did. Think about that.
As it happens, some scientists claim its not man made.
Only on You tube !
Some scientists claim the Earth os flat too?
I am a Brit living in the US and I am embarrassed....
Wonder what he's goin to say now we're in a solour minimum and we start the mini ice age that's well over due
I wonder what you will say when you research why that paper was retracted?
Climate extremism is another thing that belongs in 2019, like Anna Soubry, ditch this one too please for the sake of our sanity.
if youre offended by someone asking why you need to look at yourself
The UK has James O'Brien, but the US has Rush Limbaugh. lol
He’s a bit like Corbyn just doesn’t get it that he’s not wanted anymore
the man is wright its a natural thing if James keep is gob shut the man will explain
They say this winter is the warmest for 178 year I'm just wondering back then did we have all these cars and industries then rofl
This is SO painful. So painful.
Watch the UA-cam interview by JHB of Matt Ridley. The science is mixed and far from certain.
Our dear James... I was once a climate denier myself. It was wrong to be so.. but I've never been a brexit and democracy denier... Lol 😅
@Philip Gwilliam. "but I've never been a brexit and democracy denier..." - So, how's Brexit going on for you? Also, what exactly is a 'democracy denier'?
it's not man made
The Thames River is frozen and we no longer grow grapes.
James O'Brien: weather expert and radio presenter.
Climate science isnt meteorological local reporting
No the scientists say man is having effect but scientists also say there are many factors affecting climate change
I.e solar cycles , shifts in the poles , the global conveyor system, and to simply accept the so called science without question is the same as what religions required people to do 100s of years ago , making people feel ashamed to question science by calling them deniers is the same as the priests calling people heretic and blasphemers !!!
This is a fundamental misunderstanding of every aspect of how science works. Im sorry people actually believe what you just said. Thats very depressing that so many people are openly scientifically illiterate enough to spread lies that we arent allowed to question science.
You have always been allowed to question science, which is why actual scientists publish ever detail of their study so you can take the decades of work to get the proper education to then correctly perform in said scientific field and then repeat or debunk the findings of your fellow scientists.
The only people who assert that scientific consensus is somehow unquestionable, is someone who doesnt understand how science actually works, and most likely holds views that are in conflict with the science and they refuse to put in the effort required to get the education needed correctly understand and question the subject.
@@ahh_yes_mr_bax love how you pretend am scientifically illiterate without quoting any scientific papers from legitimate scientist in the field .
And yes I am questioning the science you are the ones essentially saying I can not question the science that backs up your beliefs .
You leftys are a cult
@@neardark369 i love how you pretend to have not read how you can actually question the science. your emotion based cult delusions are strange. I dont know why you pretend you cant question the science. That is just lies you believe because some aspect of science hurts your feelings and you cant find any science to support your emotion based beliefs.
Thats just how cults work. For example you didnt address anything i actually said and just pretended i need to cite something to prove that you dont know how to properly question science. Im sorry science hurts your dogmatic feelings but please stop pretending you being wrong magically means you arent allowed to question the science.
The science doesnt care about your weak feelings.
Remember when someone explains how to properly question the science just double down on your right wing feelings and pretend they said you cant question the science. Thats totally logic and not dishonest at all. (Sarcasm)
@@ahh_yes_mr_bax lol listen to yourself getting so touchy , I always said you could question the science it's you nutters on the left saying you cannot question the consensus on climate ....and I am not addressing what you said because this thread is over a year old and I am finished with this old story .
I say you are in the cult of the left you say am in the cult of the right then so be it I can live with that . See ya
I would love to hear an arguement with someone as clever as the host for once. Any topic will do.
Search James O' Brien VS Frank Lampard. It was enjoyable listening to James backpedal at speed.
Let the caller talk and explain his argument.... grrrr