Why did the Yale researchers call for Zero Population Growth
in 1970, when we were at only 4 billion?
http://berkeleyearth.org/archive/2019-temperatures/
Global Temperature Report for 2019
Berkeley Earth, a Calif-based non-profit research org, has been
preparing independent analyses of global mean temp changes
since 2013. The following is our report on global mean temp
during 2019.

We conclude that 2019 was the second warmest year on Earth
since 1850. The global mean temp in 2019 was colder than
2016, but warmer than every other year that has been directly
measured. Consequently, 2016 remains the warmest year in
the period of historical observations. Year-to-year rankings are
likely to reflect short-term natural variability, but the overall
pattern remains consistent with a long-term trend towards
global warming.

Annual Temperature Anomaly -- 1850-2019
[chart]

On 15/01/2021 19:28, David P wrote:
Why did the Yale researchers call for Zero Population Growth
in 1970, when we were at only 4 billion?
http://berkeleyearth.org/archive/2019-temperatures/
Global Temperature Report for 2019
Berkeley Earth, a Calif-based non-profit research org, has been
preparing independent analyses of global mean temp changes
since 2013. The following is our report on global mean temp
during 2019.

We conclude that 2019 was the second warmest year on Earth
since 1850. The global mean temp in 2019 was colder than
2016, but warmer than every other year that has been directly
measured. Consequently, 2016 remains the warmest year in
the period of historical observations. Year-to-year rankings are
likely to reflect short-term natural variability, but the overall
pattern remains consistent with a long-term trend towards
global warming.

Annual Temperature Anomaly -- 1850-2019
[chart]


Yes, almost the warmest that it has been since the end of the little ice
age. And this is news?

On 15/01/2021 20:16, newshound wrote:
On 15/01/2021 19:28, David P wrote:
Why did the Yale researchers call for Zero Population Growth
in 1970, when we were at only 4 billion?
http://berkeleyearth.org/archive/2019-temperatures/
Global Temperature Report for 2019
Berkeley Earth, a Calif-based non-profit research org, has been
preparing independent analyses of global mean temp changes
since 2013. The following is our report on global mean temp
during 2019.

We conclude that 2019 was the second warmest year on Earth
since 1850. The global mean temp in 2019 was colder than
2016, but warmer than every other year that has been directly
measured. Consequently, 2016 remains the warmest year in
the period of historical observations. Year-to-year rankings are
likely to reflect short-term natural variability, but the overall
pattern remains consistent with a long-term trend towards
global warming.

Annual Temperature Anomaly -- 1850-2019
[chart]


Yes, almost the warmest that it has been since the end of the little ice
age. And this is news?

Some people would disagree with you and say CO2 levels were higher in
1900 than they are now.

"Fredxx" wrote in message
...
On 15/01/2021 20:16, newshound wrote:
On 15/01/2021 19:28, David P wrote:
Why did the Yale researchers call for Zero Population Growth
in 1970, when we were at only 4 billion?
http://berkeleyearth.org/archive/2019-temperatures/
Global Temperature Report for 2019
Berkeley Earth, a Calif-based non-profit research org, has been
preparing independent analyses of global mean temp changes
since 2013. The following is our report on global mean temp
during 2019.

We conclude that 2019 was the second warmest year on Earth
since 1850. The global mean temp in 2019 was colder than
2016, but warmer than every other year that has been directly
measured. Consequently, 2016 remains the warmest year in
the period of historical observations. Year-to-year rankings are
likely to reflect short-term natural variability, but the overall
pattern remains consistent with a long-term trend towards
global warming.

Annual Temperature Anomaly -- 1850-2019
[chart]


Yes, almost the warmest that it has been since the end of the little ice
age. And this is news?

Some people would disagree with you and say CO2 levels were higher in 1900
than they are now.

Only the fools that dont have a ****ing clue.

On Sat, 16 Jan 2021 11:22:37 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread

--
Website (from 2007) dedicated to the 86-year-old senile Australian
cretin's pathological trolling:
https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/r...d-faq.2973853/

David P wrote:
Why did the Yale researchers call for Zero Population Growth
in 1970, when we were at only 4 billion?
http://berkeleyearth.org/archive/2019-temperatures/

Because even then there were too many of us?!

--
Chris Green
·

On 15/01/2021 20:03, Chris Green wrote:
David P wrote:
Why did the Yale researchers call for Zero Population Growth
in 1970, when we were at only 4 billion?
http://berkeleyearth.org/archive/2019-temperatures/

Because even then there were too many of us?!

So how come, Covid apart, we are now pretty much all better off and
healthier than we were then.

I worried quite a lot about what "the experts" were saying in the 60's
and early 70's. But, being a scientist, I am a great believer in data,
and that shows unequivocally that they were wrong. I see no reason to be
equally swayed by current predictions.

On 16/01/2021 12:15, newshound wrote:
On 15/01/2021 20:03, Chris Green wrote:
David P wrote:
Why did the Yale researchers call for Zero Population Growth
in 1970, when we were at only 4 billion?
http://berkeleyearth.org/archive/2019-temperatures/

Because even then there were too many of us?!

So how come, Covid apart, we are now pretty much all better off and
healthier than we were then.

I worried quite a lot about what "the experts" were saying in the 60's
and early 70's. But, being a scientist, I am a great believer in data,
and that shows unequivocally that they were wrong. I see no reason to be
equally swayed by current predictions.

The cartoon for this is:

http://vps.templar.co.uk/Cartoons%20...ex-gregory.jpg

--
€œThere are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isnt true; the
other is to refuse to believe what is true.€�

€”Soren Kierkegaard

On 16/01/2021 12:15, newshound wrote:
On 15/01/2021 20:03, Chris Green wrote:
David P wrote:
Why did the Yale researchers call for Zero Population Growth
in 1970, when we were at only 4 billion?
http://berkeleyearth.org/archive/2019-temperatures/

Because even then there were too many of us?!

So how come, Covid apart, we are now pretty much all better off and
healthier than we were then.

Who is 'we' ?. There are now a couple of billion extra people who
are neither healthier or better off. The internet has allowed
terrorists and other nutcases to spread their poison more widely
and there are far more displaced people than in the 70's because
of war and poverty.

And it is now impossible for an FTB to get a mortgage to buy a
'doer upper' property and move up the property ladder. Most are now
enforced renters.

I worried quite a lot about what "the experts" were saying in the 60's
and early 70's. But, being a scientist, I am a great believer in data,
and that shows unequivocally that they were wrong. I see no reason to be
equally swayed by current predictions.

They were right about the ozone hole, caused by refridgerants and
aerosol propellants, and also about the destruction of Scandi
pine forests by S02 emissions from UK power stations.

They were wrong about 'beating Cancer', a phrase that was
bandied about back then. The Imperial Cancer Research Fund (as it
was called then) paid £1 million for a miracle new 'cure' called
Beta Interferon (also what it was called back then). Not much came of
it. They didn't even know if what they got for their million quid
was actually what they thought they were getting !.

In article , Andrew
wrote:
On 16/01/2021 12:15, newshound wrote:
On 15/01/2021 20:03, Chris Green wrote:
David P wrote:
Why did the Yale researchers call for Zero Population Growth in 1970,
when we were at only 4 billion?
http://berkeleyearth.org/archive/2019-temperatures/

Because even then there were too many of us?!

So how come, Covid apart, we are now pretty much all better off and
healthier than we were then.

Who is 'we' ?. There are now a couple of billion extra people who are
neither healthier or better off. The internet has allowed terrorists and
other nutcases to spread their poison more widely and there are far more
displaced people than in the 70's because of war and poverty.

And it is now impossible for an FTB to get a mortgage to buy a 'doer
upper' property and move up the property ladder. Most are now enforced
renters.

I worried quite a lot about what "the experts" were saying in the 60's
and early 70's. But, being a scientist, I am a great believer in data,
and that shows unequivocally that they were wrong. I see no reason to
be equally swayed by current predictions.

They were right about the ozone hole, caused by refridgerants and aerosol
propellants, and also about the destruction of Scandi pine forests by S02
emissions from UK power stations.

Wrong. The SO2 was coming in from Canada over the UK.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On 16/01/2021 13:48, charles wrote:
In article , Andrew
wrote:
On 16/01/2021 12:15, newshound wrote:
On 15/01/2021 20:03, Chris Green wrote:
David P wrote:
Why did the Yale researchers call for Zero Population Growth in 1970,
when we were at only 4 billion?
http://berkeleyearth.org/archive/2019-temperatures/

Because even then there were too many of us?!

So how come, Covid apart, we are now pretty much all better off and
healthier than we were then.

Who is 'we' ?. There are now a couple of billion extra people who are
neither healthier or better off. The internet has allowed terrorists and
other nutcases to spread their poison more widely and there are far more
displaced people than in the 70's because of war and poverty.

And it is now impossible for an FTB to get a mortgage to buy a 'doer
upper' property and move up the property ladder. Most are now enforced
renters.

I worried quite a lot about what "the experts" were saying in the 60's
and early 70's. But, being a scientist, I am a great believer in data,
and that shows unequivocally that they were wrong. I see no reason to
be equally swayed by current predictions.

They were right about the ozone hole, caused by refridgerants and aerosol
propellants, and also about the destruction of Scandi pine forests by S02
emissions from UK power stations.

Wrong. The SO2 was coming in from Canada over the UK.


The prevailing winds that the UK generally has, means our
pollution heads out over Denmark and Norway. Canadian
emissions might have added to it, but the UK was a significant
source.

On 16 Jan 2021 at 12:43:38 GMT, "Andrew"
wrote:

On 16/01/2021 12:15, newshound wrote:
On 15/01/2021 20:03, Chris Green wrote:
David P wrote:
Why did the Yale researchers call for Zero Population Growth
in 1970, when we were at only 4 billion?
http://berkeleyearth.org/archive/2019-temperatures/

Because even then there were too many of us?!

So how come, Covid apart, we are now pretty much all better off and
healthier than we were then.

Who is 'we' ?. There are now a couple of billion extra people who
are neither healthier or better off. The internet has allowed
terrorists and other nutcases to spread their poison more widely
and there are far more displaced people than in the 70's because
of war and poverty.

And it is now impossible for an FTB to get a mortgage to buy a
'doer upper' property and move up the property ladder. Most are now
enforced renters.

I worried quite a lot about what "the experts" were saying in the 60's
and early 70's. But, being a scientist, I am a great believer in data,
and that shows unequivocally that they were wrong. I see no reason to be
equally swayed by current predictions.

They were right about the ozone hole, caused by refridgerants and
aerosol propellants, and also about the destruction of Scandi
pine forests by S02 emissions from UK power stations.

They were wrong about 'beating Cancer', a phrase that was
bandied about back then. The Imperial Cancer Research Fund (as it
was called then) paid £1 million for a miracle new 'cure' called
Beta Interferon (also what it was called back then). Not much came of
it. They didn't even know if what they got for their million quid
was actually what they thought they were getting !.

No-one with any knowledge of the subject has *ever* talked about "curing
cancer" except as a deliberate lie to encourage ignorant people to contribute
money. It is an intrinsically silly idea. Ditto Parkinson's disease and
dementia. No doubt the marketing people would characterise the lie as an
oversimplification.

--
Roger Hayter

On 16/01/2021 12:43, Andrew wrote:
On 16/01/2021 12:15, newshound wrote:
On 15/01/2021 20:03, Chris Green wrote:
David P wrote:
Why did the Yale researchers call for Zero Population Growth
in 1970, when we were at only 4 billion?
http://berkeleyearth.org/archive/2019-temperatures/

Because even then there were too many of us?!

So how come, Covid apart, we are now pretty much all better off and
healthier than we were then.

Who is 'we' ?. There are now a couple of billion extra people who
are neither healthier or better off.

Not true. There are fewer starving people now than in 1970, even though
the population has nearly doubled. Life expectancy is better everywhere.

On 16/01/2021 14:46, newshound wrote:
On 16/01/2021 12:43, Andrew wrote:
On 16/01/2021 12:15, newshound wrote:
On 15/01/2021 20:03, Chris Green wrote:
David P wrote:
Why did the Yale researchers call for Zero Population Growth
in 1970, when we were at only 4 billion?
http://berkeleyearth.org/archive/2019-temperatures/

Because even then there were too many of us?!

So how come, Covid apart, we are now pretty much all better off and
healthier than we were then.

Who is 'we' ?. There are now a couple of billion extra people who
are neither healthier or better off.

Not true. There are fewer starving people now than in 1970, even though
the population has nearly doubled. Life expectancy is better everywhere.

I must have been imagining the LiveAid concerts in 1984 then. And places
like Darfur obviously don't exist.

"newshound" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 16/01/2021 12:43, Andrew wrote:
On 16/01/2021 12:15, newshound wrote:
On 15/01/2021 20:03, Chris Green wrote:
David P wrote:
Why did the Yale researchers call for Zero Population Growth
in 1970, when we were at only 4 billion?
http://berkeleyearth.org/archive/2019-temperatures/

Because even then there were too many of us?!

So how come, Covid apart, we are now pretty much all better off and
healthier than we were then.

Who is 'we' ?. There are now a couple of billion extra people who
are neither healthier or better off.

Not true. There are fewer starving people now than in 1970, even though
the population has nearly doubled.

Yes.

Life expectancy is better everywhere.

Thats arguable in areas ravaged by HIV/AIDS

"newshound" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 15/01/2021 20:03, Chris Green wrote:
David P wrote:
Why did the Yale researchers call for Zero Population Growth
in 1970, when we were at only 4 billion?
http://berkeleyearth.org/archive/2019-temperatures/

Because even then there were too many of us?!

So how come, Covid apart, we are now pretty much all better off and
healthier than we were then.

Thats arguable with the obesity epidemic.

I worried quite a lot about what "the experts" were saying in the 60's and
early 70's. But, being a scientist, I am a great believer in data, and
that shows unequivocally that they were wrong. I see no reason to be
equally swayed by current predictions.

And they didnt realise that the population boom would fix itself either.

On Sun, 17 Jan 2021 07:01:49 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread

--
Richard addressing senile Rodent Speed:
"**** you're thick/pathetic excuse for a troll."
MID:

David P wrote

Why did the Yale researchers call for Zero Population
Growth in 1970, when we were at only 4 billion?

Because he was a terminal ****wit that didnt have a ****ing clue.

FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread

--
addressing nym-shifting senile Rodent:
"You on the other hand are a heavyweight bull****ter who demonstrates
his particular prowess at it every day."
MID: