Foxholer
Blackballed
I think that technology will save us over the next 20/30yrs regardless of what's happening.
Now that really IS a leap of faith!:mmm:
I think that technology will save us over the next 20/30yrs regardless of what's happening.
Antartica has actually grown in recent times. The Ice in the North Pole has reduced in the Oceanic part but not over Greenland, it has increased in depth over the landed areas.
and a new god called technology is born .praise the techI think that technology will save us over the next 20/30yrs regardless of what's happening.
Of course "climate change" is a reality, it's always changed, and always will.
The question is, are all these measures we get from the governments of the world about anything other than back door taxes? That is an entirely different story.
Over the last 30 years we've been expected to believe we were about to enter the next ice age, then it was "global warming", and when that proved to be an incorrect model, we now have "change", because no matter whta happens, the scientists and tax gatherers will be right.
The biggest con in history.
I suggest you read Watermelons, the book I referenced in the first post. I think you would find it interesting.
Antartica has actually grown in recent times. The Ice in the North Pole has reduced in the Oceanic part but not over Greenland, it has increased in depth over the landed areas. As the South Pole sits over a Continent it is not so affected by the change in Ocean temperatures and has no effects from the likes of the Gulf Stream.
All this points to a rise in Ocean temperature, especially in the Northern hemisphere. I dont believe the rise in sea temperature is proven to be a result of raised CO2 levels in the atmosphere. I also believe statistics show that the Earths temperature has not warmed at all in the past 15 years.
The problem seems to be that a number of 'Experts' on climate dont seem to be able to agree on what is happening. They seem to be cherry picking data to prop up their personal beliefs and opinions. My own gut instinct tends to go against the prophets of Doom, they have scared us all witless so many times of late with false predictions of impending doom.
A question for you Snelly.
What qualifications does the writer, broadcaster that is James Delingpole have that justifies him attacking the integrity, knowledge of some of the worlds leading climate scientists ?
Indeed in his own words he does'nt do science.
This is the biggest load of tosh i've read in a long time.
I've mentioned in previous posts some excellent web sites and journals, written by people who actually know what they're on about. I suggest you read them.
The internet is a marvelous place but it allows any lunatic to print there own personal views. All i ask is you research the qualifications of said authors before believing what they write as fact.
Science is about debate and people will always have differing points of view, but without evidence it is meaning less. If the vast majority of the worlds leading climate scientists say something is wrong, the only rational thing to do is believe the evidence.
Why would the whole global scientific community be involved in a conspiracy when as a people we can't even co-operate to ease global hunger, political repression or even trouble in the middle east?:rant:
See my original post. It is not the whole scientific community. Just the ones that can get baubles and dollars from the climate change industry.
See my original post. It is not the whole scientific community. Just the ones that can get baubles and dollars from the climate change industry.
I wouldn't believe the BBC environment department if they told me that I had a hole in my backside. The whole organisation is institutionally socialist.
This is the biggest load of tosh i've read in a long time.
I've mentioned in previous posts some excellent web sites and journals, written by people who actually know what they're on about. I suggest you read them.
The internet is a marvelous place but it allows any lunatic to print there own personal views. All i ask is you research the qualifications of said authors before believing what they write as fact.
Science is about debate and people will always have differing points of view, but without evidence it is meaning less. If the vast majority of the worlds leading climate scientists say something is wrong, the only rational thing to do is believe the evidence.
Why would the whole global scientific community be involved in a conspiracy when as a people we can't even co-operate to ease global hunger, political repression or even trouble in the middle east?:rant:
This is the biggest load of tosh i've read in a long time.
I've mentioned in previous posts some excellent web sites and journals, written by people who actually know what they're on about. I suggest you read them.
The internet is a marvelous place but it allows any lunatic to print there own personal views. All i ask is you research the qualifications of said authors before believing what they write as fact.
Science is about debate and people will always have differing points of view, but without evidence it is meaning less. If the vast majority of the worlds leading climate scientists say something is wrong, the only rational thing to do is believe the evidence.
Why would the whole global scientific community be involved in a conspiracy when as a people we can't even co-operate to ease global hunger, political repression or even trouble in the middle east?:rant:
I replied twice to this post with a reasoned reply but both have not been posted. Can someone explain why?
Climate change is happening and it is natural. Everything is striving for equilibrium across physics and chemistry, across out planet and the universe. As with "electronic overshoot" a decreasing amplitude wave usually plots the progress to equilibrium. In the case of climate change it is often described as a series of thresholds which boarder periods of extreme highs and lows (relatively).
A CO2 rich earth is a haven for plants, this is how it was billions of years ago. Their prevalence for such a long time contributed to a massive climate change over the next few billions of years.
What is important is that we have accelerated things by doing what ancient earth did and add lots of CO2 to the atmosphere before the "time of plants".
We must adapt as a species to the changing environment, the accelerated change we are bringing about. Continuing as we are is only going to lead to mass starvation. Just look at any population model for any species kept in a closed environment, once the population exceeds what can be sustained the population crashes as disease and starvation steps in.
I have a LOT to say on this subject, if anyone has any questions please feel free to ask.
I do think that most of the planets problems would be lessened by a reduction in human population.
Will you be drawing up a list of names.