So all this global warning stuff is a crock of SHIT ?

[Curious Orange]

I just finished watching the programme a few minutes ago, and what strikes me is how easily panicked people are. Its almost as if they don't expect the world to change, ever. Climate change is as inevitable as another dubious LDC appeal, but the message about emissions and pollution is wrong - we should keep them to a minimum for our health.

 

[bigc]

....I still blame Mcghee.

Ironic you mention McGhee, for he was at a lecture by James Lovelock(who came up with the Gaia thesis) on the future of global warming and the need to use nuclear power.

McGhee asked a question about terrorists getting hold of these sites.

I wasn't sure if it was him at first because he sat someway back, but I had that odd feeling I recognised the voice, yet it seemed totally out of place.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

So are the ice caps melting or are they not? They never used to, apparently. Probably still McGhee's fault tho, all that hot air...

 

[Safeway]

Ironic you mention McGhee, for he was at a lecture by James Lovelock(who came up with the Gaia thesis) on the future of global warming and the need to use nuclear power.

McGhee asked a question about terrorists getting hold of these sites.

I wasn't sure if it was him at first because he sat someway back, but I had that odd feeling I recognised the voice, yet it seemed totally out of place.

Mark McGhee's joined Al-Qaeda?

 

[bigc]

Mark McGhee's joined Al-Qaeda?

Imagine the bust-ups between him and Bin Laden...

No, we're going to try a new tactic today Bin, instead of targeting capital cities we're going to go for rural areas, as to rotate our selection policy.

Oh and I gave £150,000 to an Argie who said he is excellent at making bombs but can't seem to even light a firework.

 

[looney]

A lot of smoke and mirrors.

Scientists are firmly in favour that Global warming is happening and we are in part responsible.

Well Environmental scientists(Well they would be wouldn't they?) are but others are not.

And outside of the sociology department they are as red as they come.

Funny how the left chooses to ignore all present evidence that the WTC was attacked by a bunch of nutty arabs, prefering the theory that bush did it.

And yet they willingly prostrate themselves before statistical projections.

Gets even funnier when you look at some of the "Solutions" they advocate, tried, tested and failed socialist tools of tax and targets/quotas.

I would say its pretty good to conserve energy anyway but I disagree with the fear technics applied. A bit like the passive smoking myth.

There is also enough disagreement within ES to take it with a pinch of salt.

http://www.iceagenow.com/

 

[Yorkie]

When scientists (meteorologists) can accurately predict the weather for the next 5 days then I will be more inclined to believe what they say about the next 50 years.

 

[readingstockport]

Oh dear, 3rd paragraph. Seems that Durkin c an't give up his old habits of distorting and misrepresnting peoples views.

http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/climate_change/article2347526.ece

Or perhaps we shoulds just admit he's taken the oil companies dollar and is lying about the facts instead.

 

[bigc]

A lot of smoke and mirrors.

Scientists are firmly in favour that Global warming is happening and we are in part responsible.

Well Environmental scientists(Well they would be wouldn't they?) are but others are not.

And outside of the sociology department they are as red as they come.

Funny how the left chooses to ignore all present evidence that the WTC was attacked by a bunch of nutty arabs, prefering the theory that bush did it.

And yet they willingly prostrate themselves before statistical projections.

Gets even funnier when you look at some of the "Solutions" they advocate, tried, tested and failed socialist tools of tax and targets/quotas.

I would say its pretty good to conserve energy anyway but I disagree with the fear technics applied. A bit like the passive smoking myth.

There is also enough disagreement within ES to take it with a pinch of salt.

http://www.iceagenow.com/

I'm on the left and think Dubya had nothing to do with 9/11, bar perhaps incompetence, but it was only a matter of time.

I don't know anyone who I would call left wing who believe those conspiracy theories.

I agree with you about conserving fuel, because regardless of global warming, we have finite resources.

Then again, if the sea level rises and floods Uncle Sams, I may become an eco warrior.

 

[readingstockport]

Lets be honest it's the right who think the most of these September 11th conspiricy theories. Mainly because they want to blame everything on ZOG.

 

[bigc]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KhUmCthFK0k

heh

 

[beorhthelm]

Oh dear, 3rd paragraph. Seems that Durkin c an't give up his old habits of distorting and misrepresnting peoples views.

http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/climate_change/article2347526.ece

methinks Prof Carl Wunsch protests too much, as he clearly has reservations about the human impact on climate change.


from the Royal Society:

The context for answering this question must be another question: to what extent can the climate change all by itself? The answer to the alternative question is: "a very great deal." ...
So now we come to the modern climate problem. We know that it is capable of remarkable changes without human intervention.

 

[DJ Leon]

A lot of smoke and mirrors.

Scientists are firmly in favour that Global warming is happening and we are in part responsible.

Well Environmental scientists(Well they would be wouldn't they?) are but others are not.

And outside of the sociology department they are as red as they come.

Funny how the left chooses to ignore all present evidence that the WTC was attacked by a bunch of nutty arabs, prefering the theory that bush did it.

And yet they willingly prostrate themselves before statistical projections.

Gets even funnier when you look at some of the "Solutions" they advocate, tried, tested and failed socialist tools of tax and targets/quotas.

I would say its pretty good to conserve energy anyway but I disagree with the fear technics applied. A bit like the passive smoking myth.

There is also enough disagreement within ES to take it with a pinch of salt.

http://www.iceagenow.com/

So 9/11 conspiracies are the domain of the left are they? I think you'll find their biggest supporters (at least in the US) will be right-wingers paranoid at an interventionist government.

As you say there may be a left/right agenda about how to deal with gloabl warming, but the science of it surely has nothing to do with the political spectrum.

Ultimately there's a scientist out there to tell you anything, but the majority of the scientific establishment agree that global warming is a fact and that we are contributing to it.

 

[Questions]

According to the scientific buffs, on average the earth experiences a mass extinction about every 75 million years.
Therefore another one is due or if you want to be precise, 'over due'
So for the love of Mike
We must exhaust all of the worlds resources while we still can!
Waiting till tomorrow may be too late!
Think of all the luxury's which will be lost, never to be used again, so buy a big car, burn lots of things, use up all the hair spray, crank that stat. up in the cold.
Because let's face it , when the roaches and rats survive it will be wasted on them

They`re out there already taking the piss in their little cars.


and besides what are we doing to protect ourselves from being hit by a giant haemoroid.
They are no joke just ask the dinosaurs.

 

[looney]

the majority of the scientific establishment agree that global warming is a fact and that we are contributing to it.

This is not true, the majority of Environmental Scientists beleive it, most physisists dont, geologists are divided and chemists I beleive have agreed with it.


There is still a lot of propoganda about. Look up the evidence on passive smoking and tell me that justifies action?

 

[DJ Leon]

So physicists don't believe that the planet is warming up? Do the facts not make that view kind of difficult to maintain?

And passive smoking propaganda? Why? Again, the evidence is obvious, but as with everything people like to disagree. The evidence is fairly obvious though.

 

[looney]

So physicists don't believe that the planet is warming up? Do the facts not make that view kind of difficult to maintain?

And passive smoking propaganda? Why? Again, the evidence is obvious, but as with everything people like to disagree. The evidence is fairly obvious though.

What facts would they be? As I first said the arguement is based on statistical projection.

As the link states above what is claimed is out of synch with what has happened in the past and what the ES are exstrapolating from.

But keep beleiving Blairs Weather of Mass Destruction if you want.

 

[beorhthelm]

no scientist is disputing that global warming is occuring, but there is a possiblity that CO2 is not the cause. that was the point of the program. its time to re-examine the data from a neutral stand point, because so far we only seem to hear from two lobby groups with a massive financial interest in driving their interpretation.

 

[perseus]

In prehistory (Ice Ages, just thousands of years ago) times the maximum carbon dioxide in the lower atmosphere was 300 ppm (low point was 180 ppm). Now it is 370 ppm. It is down to Mankind.

Now some people might believe it is the Gulf Stream that makes Britain warmer than Novia Scotia. That ain't it.

The climate is getting warmer and there ain't no escape. Its a fact of life. Even the Americans admit it. It is their science. Without the Americans we would only guess at it.

 

[perseus]

Gulf Stream stuff:

http://www.americanscientist.org/template/AssetDetail/assetid/51963?fulltext=true

New to me. Just found it. The school stuff read a bit dodgy, so I am not surprised.