The thread has been renamed.

Glad to hear you survived the fires. Beyond a really weird yellow sky and my car being covered in dust from fires in Portugal and sand from the Sahara, Ophelia passed me by - a bit of wind but no rain. However, the storm tracked way west of where I live and Ireland was hit badly; my family in south-west Scotland had a rotten time of it - they get a lot of Atlantic storms and they tell me this was the worst they've known. Ophelia was a truly exceptional storm in terms of its route up the eastern Atlantic - and perhaps a harbinger of things to come - but I haven't seen the worked attributions yet, just speculation.

The very long-term future of the climate, when the next glacial period starts in tens of thousands of years’ time, may well involve deliberate AGW. However, accidental AGW during an interglacial is not a pass - the article cites a 60 m sea-level rise from melting ice in Greenland and Antarctica, which would be the end of countries like the Netherlands. And for what? So the AGW happening now is understandably the priority.

Where’s the ‘edit’ feature?

The edit feature only allows a post to be edited within an hour of first posting. This doesn't reset if edited within the hour. (There have been times when I have either because I have spotted an error in what I typed or have changed my mind on reflection that I have been unable to change the original post.)

They don’t trust it.

Depends where you live. I suspect that neither of us has research to hand on how much the science around climate change is trusted and it may be the bubble effect but virtually everyone I know believes in AGW.

As for the spending of money to corrupt the perception of the public on this, those spending most have been the oil companies who clearly have a vested interest at least in the short term in convincing people that it is either a hoax or at least not true.

By the way, here’s a YouTube talk by Stefan Rahmstorf on, among other ocean currents, the Gulf Stream.

Is the Gulf Stream System Slowing? - the Earth 101 lecture

[Paradox wrote:] ...The Gulf Stream has slowed significantly. Ok, we knew that.

We know that because of people like Rahmstorf who are experts in sea-level determination.

... We spend billions of dollars trying to get models to replicate what we already know happened. ...

That is the process of attempting to understand a physical phenomenon.

These two comments illustrate the impossibility of any dialogue, since you dismiss both the attempt to understand and the people who make that attempt. There aren’t any other people and there isn’t any other method. If there were then the efforts of climate change contrarians, backed as they are by large amounts of money, would by now have established an alternative theory. They haven’t because there isn’t. It’s as simple as that.