FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > The Green party
The Green party
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"ime a bit confused here is there any point to them at all. With regards to saving the planet well the planets been around billions of years before we humans formed. Prior to our arrival Earths gone through thousands of super volcano eruptions., Earthquakes and other natural catastrphes and.. survived just fine all on its own. How exactly is recycling and not using plastic shopping bags going to save the planet exactly ?? As for windfarms creating electricity well I think its been proven that there productivity equates to about as much use as a fart in a wind tunnel. Then theres the antifrackers what exactly are they protesting against all I can see is not having cheaper energy bills. Maybe if they got a job and had to pay there own way they would instead welcome cheaper energy bills. As for fracking creates earhquakes just usual scaremongering wheres the facts ?? " . Were not trying to save the planet. Were trying to save you. I often wonder why though  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"ime a bit confused here is there any point to them at all. With regards to saving the planet well the planets been around billions of years before we humans formed. Prior to our arrival Earths gone through thousands of super volcano eruptions., Earthquakes and other natural catastrphes and.. survived just fine all on its own. How exactly is recycling and not using plastic shopping bags going to save the planet exactly ?? As for windfarms creating electricity well I think its been proven that there productivity equates to about as much use as a fart in a wind tunnel. Then theres the antifrackers what exactly are they protesting against all I can see is not having cheaper energy bills. Maybe if they got a job and had to pay there own way they would instead welcome cheaper energy bills. As for fracking creates earhquakes just usual scaremongering wheres the facts ?? . Were not trying to save the planet. Were trying to save you. I often wonder why though "like the planet ime perfectly capable of saving myself thanks  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"ime a bit confused here is there any point to them at all. With regards to saving the planet well the planets been around billions of years before we humans formed. Prior to our arrival Earths gone through thousands of super volcano eruptions., Earthquakes and other natural catastrphes and.. survived just fine all on its own. How exactly is recycling and not using plastic shopping bags going to save the planet exactly ?? As for windfarms creating electricity well I think its been proven that there productivity equates to about as much use as a fart in a wind tunnel. Then theres the antifrackers what exactly are they protesting against all I can see is not having cheaper energy bills. Maybe if they got a job and had to pay there own way they would instead welcome cheaper energy bills. As for fracking creates earhquakes just usual scaremongering wheres the facts ?? . Were not trying to save the planet. Were trying to save you. I often wonder why though
like the planet ime perfectly capable of saving myself thanks ". Your obviously not. You can't even be arsed to read the report by the fracking company that stated, they caused the the fucking earthquakes with fracking. PS the planets got 5 billion years before the sun swallows it up. Depleted uraniums half life is about 5 billion years. That's means we've polluted the planet with it...... Forever! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"ime a bit confused here is there any point to them at all. With regards to saving the planet well the planets been around billions of years before we humans formed. Prior to our arrival Earths gone through thousands of super volcano eruptions., Earthquakes and other natural catastrphes and.. survived just fine all on its own. How exactly is recycling and not using plastic shopping bags going to save the planet exactly ?? As for windfarms creating electricity well I think its been proven that there productivity equates to about as much use as a fart in a wind tunnel. Then theres the antifrackers what exactly are they protesting against all I can see is not having cheaper energy bills. Maybe if they got a job and had to pay there own way they would instead welcome cheaper energy bills. As for fracking creates earhquakes just usual scaremongering wheres the facts ?? . Were not trying to save the planet. Were trying to save you. I often wonder why though
like the planet ime perfectly capable of saving myself thanks .
Your obviously not.
You can't even be arsed to read the report by the fracking company that stated, they caused the the fucking earthquakes with fracking.
PS the planets got 5 billion years before the sun swallows it up.
Depleted uraniums half life is about 5 billion years.
That's means we've polluted the planet with it...... Forever!"5 billion years before the sun dies ..hows that our fault exactly ? The sun is a star and destined to die an implode at some time, not sure if yr aware bur even stars don't live forever. 5 billion years if were lucky enough to avoid large meteor colliions in the meantime. The report by the fracking company you refer to. Whats the report called and whats the name of the fracking company you wouldn't be trying to put the willie up me now with yr scaremongering wud ya | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Totally irrelevant Deon, but can I photograph you astride my motorbike with your toes on display? x"If you must. I guess you would want me to wear my leather outfit to huh? So sodding predictable.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Totally irrelevant Deon, but can I photograph you astride my motorbike with your toes on display? x
If you must. I guess you would want me to wear my leather outfit to huh?
So sodding predictable. "Lol, oh go on then, just this once!  x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"ime a bit confused here is there any point to them at all. With regards to saving the planet well the planets been around billions of years before we humans formed. Prior to our arrival Earths gone through thousands of super volcano eruptions., Earthquakes and other natural catastrphes and.. survived just fine all on its own. How exactly is recycling and not using plastic shopping bags going to save the planet exactly ?? As for windfarms creating electricity well I think its been proven that there productivity equates to about as much use as a fart in a wind tunnel. Then theres the antifrackers what exactly are they protesting against all I can see is not having cheaper energy bills. Maybe if they got a job and had to pay there own way they would instead welcome cheaper energy bills. As for fracking creates earhquakes just usual scaremongering wheres the facts ?? . Were not trying to save the planet. Were trying to save you. I often wonder why though
like the planet ime perfectly capable of saving myself thanks .
Your obviously not.
You can't even be arsed to read the report by the fracking company that stated, they caused the the fucking earthquakes with fracking.
PS the planets got 5 billion years before the sun swallows it up.
Depleted uraniums half life is about 5 billion years.
That's means we've polluted the planet with it...... Forever!
5 billion years before the sun dies ..hows that our fault exactly ? The sun is a star and destined to die an implode at some time, not sure if yr aware bur even stars don't live forever. 5 billion years if were lucky enough to avoid large meteor colliions in the meantime.
The report by the fracking company you refer to. Whats the report called and whats the name of the fracking company you wouldn't be trying to put the willie up me now with yr scaremongering wud ya ". Just read something.... Anything, my post will do for staters. I said the planet has a life span of 5 billion years, depleted uranium has the same life span, that means we (humans) have polluted it with du for its entire life. Google cuadrilla/ Blackpool. It's there in black and white... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But Uranium-238 is a naturally occurring isotope; how do you intend to do anything about it?" . Depleted uranium isn't u238. Isotopes of uranium come in many forms u238 being the most common but you can't dig up du it's a byproduct of uranium enrichment for nuclear fuels or weapons. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"ime a bit confused here is there any point to them at all. With regards to saving the planet well the planets been around billions of years before we humans formed. Prior to our arrival Earths gone through thousands of super volcano eruptions., Earthquakes and other natural catastrphes and.. survived just fine all on its own. How exactly is recycling and not using plastic shopping bags going to save the planet exactly ?? As for windfarms creating electricity well I think its been proven that there productivity equates to about as much use as a fart in a wind tunnel. Then theres the antifrackers what exactly are they protesting against all I can see is not having cheaper energy bills. Maybe if they got a job and had to pay there own way they would instead welcome cheaper energy bills. As for fracking creates earhquakes just usual scaremongering wheres the facts ?? . Were not trying to save the planet. Were trying to save you. I often wonder why though
like the planet ime perfectly capable of saving myself thanks .
Your obviously not.
You can't even be arsed to read the report by the fracking company that stated, they caused the the fucking earthquakes with fracking.
PS the planets got 5 billion years before the sun swallows it up.
Depleted uraniums half life is about 5 billion years.
That's means we've polluted the planet with it...... Forever!
5 billion years before the sun dies ..hows that our fault exactly ? The sun is a star and destined to die an implode at some time, not sure if yr aware bur even stars don't live forever. 5 billion years if were lucky enough to avoid large meteor colliions in the meantime.
The report by the fracking company you refer to. Whats the report called and whats the name of the fracking company you wouldn't be trying to put the willie up me now with yr scaremongering wud ya .
Just read something.... Anything, my post will do for staters.
I said the planet has a life span of 5 billion years, depleted uranium has the same life span, that means we (humans) have polluted it with du for its entire life.
Google cuadrilla/ Blackpool.
It's there in black and white... "googled it they said possibly but haven't owned up outright/ said "may" have caused a small shock barely making it onto the richter scale. Rare minerals not found on other frack sites so all other sites safe to start drilling roll on cheaper energy bills | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"ime a bit confused here is there any point to them at all. With regards to saving the planet well the planets been around billions of years before we humans formed. Prior to our arrival Earths gone through thousands of super volcano eruptions., Earthquakes and other natural catastrphes and.. survived just fine all on its own. How exactly is recycling and not using plastic shopping bags going to save the planet exactly ?? As for windfarms creating electricity well I think its been proven that there productivity equates to about as much use as a fart in a wind tunnel. Then theres the antifrackers what exactly are they protesting against all I can see is not having cheaper energy bills. Maybe if they got a job and had to pay there own way they would instead welcome cheaper energy bills. As for fracking creates earhquakes just usual scaremongering wheres the facts ?? . Were not trying to save the planet. Were trying to save you. I often wonder why though
like the planet ime perfectly capable of saving myself thanks .
Your obviously not.
You can't even be arsed to read the report by the fracking company that stated, they caused the the fucking earthquakes with fracking.
PS the planets got 5 billion years before the sun swallows it up.
Depleted uraniums half life is about 5 billion years.
That's means we've polluted the planet with it...... Forever!
5 billion years before the sun dies ..hows that our fault exactly ? The sun is a star and destined to die an implode at some time, not sure if yr aware bur even stars don't live forever. 5 billion years if were lucky enough to avoid large meteor colliions in the meantime.
The report by the fracking company you refer to. Whats the report called and whats the name of the fracking company you wouldn't be trying to put the willie up me now with yr scaremongering wud ya .
Just read something.... Anything, my post will do for staters.
I said the planet has a life span of 5 billion years, depleted uranium has the same life span, that means we (humans) have polluted it with du for its entire life.
Google cuadrilla/ Blackpool.
It's there in black and white...
googled it they said possibly but haven't owned up outright/ said "may" have caused a small shock barely making it onto the richter scale. Rare minerals not found on other frack sites so all other sites safe to start drilling roll on cheaper energy bills ". I don't know what you read but there own seismologist wrote in the report to Blackpool and flyde council that the fracking was responsible for over 1500 mini quakes. Maybe not a big deal if you live 25 miles away, but to those within 3 miles it certainly was. As for cheaper bills, well don't hold your breath, fracked oil and gas is around 5 times more expensive to produce than conventional, hence since the price drop they've all dropped their plans and several in the US and AUS have already gone bust. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Were not trying to save the planet. Were trying to save you. I often wonder why though "Perhaps, if the Green party limited its policies to environmental issues, it might get greater support from the public? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Were not trying to save the planet. Were trying to save you. I often wonder why though
Perhaps, if the Green party limited its policies to environmental issues, it might get greater support from the public?". You say that as if the environment and humans aren't connected. To save the human species from killing itself through utter selfishness, you have to save the environment, the two are intertwined. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Personally I think that the Green Party need to set up shop in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Russia and most of the other oil producing nations. Once they have that lot on side we could possible tolerate their meaningless drivel here. Until the oil producers are governed by Green politics the Green Party is --- quite frankly - just a bit of nonsense." . Those 4 countries only use 10% of the oil. That's why it's targeted at the users not the sellers. Europe and the US use somewhere in the region of 50%. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Personally I think that the Green Party need to set up shop in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Russia and most of the other oil producing nations. Once they have that lot on side we could possible tolerate their meaningless drivel here. Until the oil producers are governed by Green politics the Green Party is --- quite frankly - just a bit of nonsense.. Those 4 countries only use 10% of the oil. That's why it's targeted at the users not the sellers. Europe and the US use somewhere in the region of 50%." So set up in India and China then? Lets see some Green politics in China and then come back and make the cataclysmic changes in this country that will send us back to the dark ages all for the sake of a microscopic effect on the planets environment. Our output is an irrelevance in the greater scheme of things. The Greens just target mature and complacent societies for the sake of an easy ride. That means that they have no conviction whatsoever in their policies because they wont set up anywhere where they are likely to be given a clip around the ear (at least). | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"They are useless.They have less idea than UKIP. They have been brought into the debate in the hope that they will attract some of the UKIP vote, because the main parties can't provide a cogent response. The Mad Hatters Tea Party is more electable than the Greens." They are about as in touch with the common man as Ukip too! They can crack on with Fracking on my land anytime! Can't wait for the dosh to start rolling in and give this country (and me) some much needed revenue. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"ime a bit confused here is there any point to them at all. With regards to saving the planet well the planets been around billions of years before we humans formed. Prior to our arrival Earths gone through thousands of super volcano eruptions., Earthquakes and other natural catastrphes and.. survived just fine all on its own. How exactly is recycling and not using plastic shopping bags going to save the planet exactly ?? As for windfarms creating electricity well I think its been proven that there productivity equates to about as much use as a fart in a wind tunnel. Then theres the antifrackers what exactly are they protesting against all I can see is not having cheaper energy bills. Maybe if they got a job and had to pay there own way they would instead welcome cheaper energy bills. As for fracking creates earhquakes just usual scaremongering wheres the facts ?? . Were not trying to save the planet. Were trying to save you. I often wonder why though
like the planet ime perfectly capable of saving myself thanks .
Your obviously not.
You can't even be arsed to read the report by the fracking company that stated, they caused the the fucking earthquakes with fracking.
PS the planets got 5 billion years before the sun swallows it up.
Depleted uraniums half life is about 5 billion years.
That's means we've polluted the planet with it...... Forever!
5 billion years before the sun dies ..hows that our fault exactly ? The sun is a star and destined to die an implode at some time, not sure if yr aware bur even stars don't live forever. 5 billion years if were lucky enough to avoid large meteor colliions in the meantime.
"I think you've missed the point here. Not that I totally agree with sexy-bum but the point was that the uranium, that we have produced, will only behalf gone by the time the earth is swallowed by our dying sun in about 5 million years. " The report by the fracking company you refer to. Whats the report called and whats the name of the fracking company you wouldn't be trying to put the willie up me now with yr scaremongering wud ya " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"One party's activity would potentially mitigate the severity of human induced global warming. But their party plan, as little as I've read it, is much wider than global warming - it's about political plans for the country. Some good proposals including bringing trains under state power and reducing tax avoidance." You mean back to the good old days of British Rail, dirty slow trains, constant strikes and curled up Travelers Fair sandwiches. Sounds great to me. And which Tax avoidance are they going to stop? Removing the personal tax free allowance, banning Duty Free and VAT exempt shopping when on holiday, maybe even remove the capitol gains tax exemption from first home sales. All of those are tax avoidance! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Personally I think that the Green Party need to set up shop in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Russia and most of the other oil producing nations. Once they have that lot on side we could possible tolerate their meaningless drivel here. Until the oil producers are governed by Green politics the Green Party is --- quite frankly - just a bit of nonsense.. Those 4 countries only use 10% of the oil. That's why it's targeted at the users not the sellers. Europe and the US use somewhere in the region of 50%. So set up in India and China then? Lets see some Green politics in China and then come back and make the cataclysmic changes in this country that will send us back to the dark ages all for the sake of a microscopic effect on the planets environment. Our output is an irrelevance in the greater scheme of things. The Greens just target mature and complacent societies for the sake of an easy ride. That means that they have no conviction whatsoever in their policies because they wont set up anywhere where they are likely to be given a clip around the ear (at least)." . China?. It has invested in the largest wind farm in the world and the largest hydro electric dam in the world. They've also invested in maglev trains (faster and more efficient). In fact China lead the world in clean investment last year (50 billion or so), there way ahead of the usa and they've rolled out trading emissions in six of their most advanced cantons. This year they start on carbon based financial penalties. You know for someone who claims to do business there, you seem to know very little about it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"One party's activity would potentially mitigate the severity of human induced global warming. But their party plan, as little as I've read it, is much wider than global warming - it's about political plans for the country. Some good proposals including bringing trains under state power and reducing tax avoidance. You mean back to the good old days of British Rail, dirty slow trains, constant strikes and curled up Travelers Fair sandwiches. Sounds great to me. And which Tax avoidance are they going to stop? Removing the personal tax free allowance, banning Duty Free and VAT exempt shopping when on holiday, maybe even remove the capitol gains tax exemption from first home sales. All of those are tax avoidance!" you can't blame bad management on a good system. State run trains in France Germany, Switzerland, China, Holland, Sweden and Japan are amongst the best in the world. In fact compare them to countries that have privatised rail systems and they totally out perform them on every level. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"One party's activity would potentially mitigate the severity of human induced global warming. But their party plan, as little as I've read it, is much wider than global warming - it's about political plans for the country. Some good proposals including bringing trains under state power and reducing tax avoidance. You mean back to the good old days of British Rail, dirty slow trains, constant strikes and curled up Travelers Fair sandwiches. Sounds great to me. And which Tax avoidance are they going to stop? Removing the personal tax free allowance, banning Duty Free and VAT exempt shopping when on holiday, maybe even remove the capitol gains tax exemption from first home sales. All of those are tax avoidance! you can't blame bad management on a good system. State run trains in France Germany, Switzerland, China, Holland, Sweden and Japan are amongst the best in the world. In fact compare them to countries that have privatised rail systems and they totally out perform them on every level." Well I don't live in any of those countries, I live in Britain and I'm old enough to remember what it was like when most of our industries and transport services were run by the state. You must be loosing your memory Sexy-bum. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"One party's activity would potentially mitigate the severity of human induced global warming. But their party plan, as little as I've read it, is much wider than global warming - it's about political plans for the country. Some good proposals including bringing trains under state power and reducing tax avoidance. You mean back to the good old days of British Rail, dirty slow trains, constant strikes and curled up Travelers Fair sandwiches. Sounds great to me. And which Tax avoidance are they going to stop? Removing the personal tax free allowance, banning Duty Free and VAT exempt shopping when on holiday, maybe even remove the capitol gains tax exemption from first home sales. All of those are tax avoidance! you can't blame bad management on a good system. State run trains in France Germany, Switzerland, China, Holland, Sweden and Japan are amongst the best in the world. In fact compare them to countries that have privatised rail systems and they totally out perform them on every level. Well I don't live in any of those countries, I live in Britain and I'm old enough to remember what it was like when most of our industries and transport services were run by the state. You must be loosing your memory Sexy-bum. " . No I agree they were terrible... But from bad management not a bad system of public ownership. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Were not trying to save the planet. Were trying to save you. I often wonder why though
Perhaps, if the Green party limited its policies to environmental issues, it might get greater support from the public?.
You say that as if the environment and humans aren't connected.
To save the human species from killing itself through utter selfishness, you have to save the environment, the two are intertwined."Now that is true. It is, however, a bit of a shame that their other policies are uncosted crap. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Were not trying to save the planet. Were trying to save you. I often wonder why though
Perhaps, if the Green party limited its policies to environmental issues, it might get greater support from the public?.
You say that as if the environment and humans aren't connected.
To save the human species from killing itself through utter selfishness, you have to save the environment, the two are intertwined.
Now that is true. It is, however, a bit of a shame that their other policies are uncosted crap." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"One party's activity would potentially mitigate the severity of human induced global warming. But their party plan, as little as I've read it, is much wider than global warming - it's about political plans for the country. Some good proposals including bringing trains under state power and reducing tax avoidance." . How would be printing trains back under state control help anyone ?. I do not believe that people should have to pay higher fares to have state control. At least under the privatised services there is an element of competition. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The old hippie in me was attracted to the green party until I read their full manifesto. I like a lot of the "green" stuff, but you should read what else is on their agenda. Things like, making working for a living a choice - i.e. guaranteed benefits and no compulsion to get a job if you don't want. Unlimited immigration and immediate access to our benefits, education and health systems. Seriously, go read it. Surely, no sane person would ever vote for them." They sound remarkably like the labour party lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"One party's activity would potentially mitigate the severity of human induced global warming. But their party plan, as little as I've read it, is much wider than global warming - it's about political plans for the country. Some good proposals including bringing trains under state power and reducing tax avoidance.. How would be printing trains back under state control help anyone ?. I do not believe that people should have to pay higher fares to have state control. At least under the privatised services there is an element of competition. " Jep definitely no inflation busting fare hikes since privatisation eh. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"ime confused here how are state or privatised trains gonna save the planet and whats trains gotta do with the green party ?" People are being priced off the privatised rail network resulting in more car journeys. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I am of the opinion that the reason they are called 'The Green Party' is because 'Monster Raving Loony Party' was already taken. " Cliché bingo!! You only need 'lentil munchers' for a full housey housey | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I am of the opinion that the reason they are called 'The Green Party' is because 'Monster Raving Loony Party' was already taken. Cliché bingo!! You only need 'lentil munchers' for a full housey housey" lol at lentil munchers what about tree huggers though | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"well in order to do my bit to save the planet from now on ime gonna refuse plastic carrier bags and learn how to walk home with my shopping balanced on my head. " take yer shopping trolley or a blue tesco shopping bag with ladybirds walking up the sides, every bit helps. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"One party's activity would potentially mitigate the severity of human induced global warming. But their party plan, as little as I've read it, is much wider than global warming - it's about political plans for the country. Some good proposals including bringing trains under state power and reducing tax avoidance.. How would be printing trains back under state control help anyone ?. I do not believe that people should have to pay higher fares to have state control. At least under the privatised services there is an element of competition. " Imagine the tube paying more And standing up more.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I suppose the only benefits from Global warming for me is the beach will be closer to my house. " also save on being ripped of by travel agents going on hols abroad to get a bit of a hotter temp ..just stay home | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The old hippie in me was attracted to the green party until I read their full manifesto. I like a lot of the "green" stuff, but you should read what else is on their agenda. Things like, making working for a living a choice - i.e. guaranteed benefits and no compulsion to get a job if you don't want. Unlimited immigration and immediate access to our benefits, education and health systems. Seriously, go read it. Surely, no sane person would ever vote for them." Correct. Only insane people would support or vote for the Green party. Oh... and people who don't work and spend all day on the Internet cos they have nothing better to do. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why are we to blame for global warming ? Some science programmes I watch state that the planet goes through certain stages every couple of thousand years such as a new ice age which they predict occurs around every 10,000 years. This has nothing to do with us causing it simply the projectory of our planets orbit which every 10,000 years or so is furtherst away from the sun making the planet much much colder, ime still of the mind that blaming us for killing the planet is nothing more than a con designed to fleece us into giving more hard earned cash through stealth taxes. Theres 2 types of scientists the ones that have integrity and the ones that dont. the latter whose scientific research is funded by the politicians ..they say what there political masters tell them to say through fear of if they dont they will have there funding withdrawn. All the scientists that say mankind are killing the planet I take as political scientific spin doctors. " In geological terms, the amount of time that humans have been on earth equates to the blink of an eye on a hundred years time span. Within that blink of an eyelid one ten thousandth of that time equates to the period since the industrial revolution. So if you take one ten thousandth of the time of the blink of an eye on an overall time span of a hundred years. That amount of time is changing the planet more than ever before? I don't buy it. Global warming is a fact of life. Man made global warming is a con and my personal carbon footprint is testament to the fact that I don't buy it. Five long haul flights already booked for this year and four European flights. Eat my Fucking carbon Greenies | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why are we to blame for global warming ? Some science programmes I watch state that the planet goes through certain stages every couple of thousand years such as a new ice age which they predict occurs around every 10,000 years. This has nothing to do with us causing it simply the projectory of our planets orbit which every 10,000 years or so is furtherst away from the sun making the planet much much colder, ime still of the mind that blaming us for killing the planet is nothing more than a con designed to fleece us into giving more hard earned cash through stealth taxes. Theres 2 types of scientists the ones that have integrity and the ones that dont. the latter whose scientific research is funded by the politicians ..they say what there political masters tell them to say through fear of if they dont they will have there funding withdrawn. All the scientists that say mankind are killing the planet I take as political scientific spin doctors. In geological terms, the amount of time that humans have been on earth equates to the blink of an eye on a hundred years time span. Within that blink of an eyelid one ten thousandth of that time equates to the period since the industrial revolution. So if you take one ten thousandth of the time of the blink of an eye on an overall time span of a hundred years. That amount of time is changing the planet more than ever before? I don't buy it. Global warming is a fact of life. Man made global warming is a con and my personal carbon footprint is testament to the fact that I don't buy it. Five long haul flights already booked for this year and four European flights. Eat my Fucking carbon Greenies "Fracking is the future!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'm off to burn some tyres in the garden let's gets this warming thing kick started. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The old hippie in me was attracted to the green party until I read their full manifesto. I like a lot of the "green" stuff, but you should read what else is on their agenda. Things like, making working for a living a choice - i.e. guaranteed benefits and no compulsion to get a job if you don't want. Unlimited immigration and immediate access to our benefits, education and health systems. Seriously, go read it. Surely, no sane person would ever vote for them." . They sound like the perfect party for you! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I am all for conservation and recycling where we can, but I dont see the green party lobbying china or any of the other mass polluters in the world. ......do the tree huggers really think that by continually having a go at British policies they are going to save the planet? Have some more Tofu! " . Read my quote about China, in fact try reading anything. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why are we to blame for global warming ? Some science programmes I watch state that the planet goes through certain stages every couple of thousand years such as a new ice age which they predict occurs around every 10,000 years. This has nothing to do with us causing it simply the projectory of our planets orbit which every 10,000 years or so is furtherst away from the sun making the planet much much colder, ime still of the mind that blaming us for killing the planet is nothing more than a con designed to fleece us into giving more hard earned cash through stealth taxes. Theres 2 types of scientists the ones that have integrity and the ones that dont. the latter whose scientific research is funded by the politicians ..they say what there political masters tell them to say through fear of if they dont they will have there funding withdrawn. All the scientists that say mankind are killing the planet I take as political scientific spin doctors. In geological terms, the amount of time that humans have been on earth equates to the blink of an eye on a hundred years time span. Within that blink of an eyelid one ten thousandth of that time equates to the period since the industrial revolution. So if you take one ten thousandth of the time of the blink of an eye on an overall time span of a hundred years. That amount of time is changing the planet more than ever before? I don't buy it. Global warming is a fact of life. Man made global warming is a con and my personal carbon footprint is testament to the fact that I don't buy it. Five long haul flights already booked for this year and four European flights. Eat my Fucking carbon Greenies ". Don't forget you tinfoil hat at checkout in case their scanning your brainwaves... Although I'm not there'll find anything of note | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The old hippie in me was attracted to the green party until I read their full manifesto. I like a lot of the "green" stuff, but you should read what else is on their agenda. Things like, making working for a living a choice - i.e. guaranteed benefits and no compulsion to get a job if you don't want. Unlimited immigration and immediate access to our benefits, education and health systems. Seriously, go read it. Surely, no sane person would ever vote for them. Correct. Only insane people would support or vote for the Green party. Oh... and people who don't work and spend all day on the Internet cos they have nothing better to do." . Or fantasists who claim to be capitalist international jet setters but have no idea about tax law, business or Chinese investment!. You know they reckon to many long haul flights can cause low level radiation damage to the old grey matter  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why are we to blame for global warming ? Some science programmes I watch state that the planet goes through certain stages every couple of thousand years such as a new ice age which they predict occurs around every 10,000 years. This has nothing to do with us causing it simply the projectory of our planets orbit which every 10,000 years or so is furtherst away from the sun making the planet much much colder, ime still of the mind that blaming us for killing the planet is nothing more than a con designed to fleece us into giving more hard earned cash through stealth taxes. Theres 2 types of scientists the ones that have integrity and the ones that dont. the latter whose scientific research is funded by the politicians ..they say what there political masters tell them to say through fear of if they dont they will have there funding withdrawn. All the scientists that say mankind are killing the planet I take as political scientific spin doctors. " \\\\\\ Over 97% of the world's climate experts support the theory that human induced factors are causing this global warming. Others who have been given media exposure are typically not experts in this field. The IPCC report in the past year explains the evidence and projections and is essential reading, whether one would never vote for the Green party or not. They are just one particular political party with an environmental agenda. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"22 thousand climate scientists with expert knowledge, millions of pieces of data, thousands of repeatable experiments, hundreds of the best university's in the world, all totally in agreement about the evidence the method and the solutions. So either 22,000 highly trained scientists from all over the world are colluding in planting evidence, doctoring data and all these people who don't even know each other, are conspiring together in one of the world's most elaborate hoaxs for the purpose of getting more tax!!!!!. Something which every government in the world has been doing anyhow regardless of climate change. But I watched a guy on utube said it was bollocks because the world's always changed over thousands of years... Oh yeah right a guy on utube... He must be right and those 22000 other scientists are all liars after my money... Wait, what's that, aha oh yeah... Oh right I'm just clinically fucking insane burning tyres in my back garden, as that will obviously make my holiday weather better..... "What really muddies the water for some are the leaked e mails from 2009 and 2011, especially the bits about concealing and destroying research so it can't be replicated or tested which is a contradiction of the normal scientific procedure. There is a lot of mistrust of man made science because of that course of action taken by the people receiving funding. It would put everything to bed if they started releasing all data so it could be independently tested. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"22 thousand climate scientists with expert knowledge, millions of pieces of data, thousands of repeatable experiments, hundreds of the best university's in the world, all totally in agreement about the evidence the method and the solutions. So either 22,000 highly trained scientists from all over the world are colluding in planting evidence, doctoring data and all these people who don't even know each other, are conspiring together in one of the world's most elaborate hoaxs for the purpose of getting more tax!!!!!. Something which every government in the world has been doing anyhow regardless of climate change. But I watched a guy on utube said it was bollocks because the world's always changed over thousands of years... Oh yeah right a guy on utube... He must be right and those 22000 other scientists are all liars after my money... Wait, what's that, aha oh yeah... Oh right I'm just clinically fucking insane burning tyres in my back garden, as that will obviously make my holiday weather better.....
What really muddies the water for some are the leaked e mails from 2009 and 2011, especially the bits about concealing and destroying research so it can't be replicated or tested which is a contradiction of the normal scientific procedure.
There is a lot of mistrust of man made science because of that course of action taken by the people receiving funding.
It would put everything to bed if they started releasing all data so it could be independently tested.". I take it your talking about climategate. 1 guy from Norwich university who attempted to hide data from Chinese weather stations in a 20 year old study that didn't fit in with a particular piece of an experiment. So this one guy and if I remember correctly his side kick (who was exonerated) , this guy was shopped by fellow climate scientists for his data correction and when he emailed other climate scientists asking them to delete emails and data, they did neither!. It's hardly Watergate. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"22 thousand climate scientists with expert knowledge, millions of pieces of data, thousands of repeatable experiments, hundreds of the best university's in the world, all totally in agreement about the evidence the method and the solutions. So either 22,000 highly trained scientists from all over the world are colluding in planting evidence, doctoring data and all these people who don't even know each other, are conspiring together in one of the world's most elaborate hoaxs for the purpose of getting more tax!!!!!. Something which every government in the world has been doing anyhow regardless of climate change. " But that's not really quite true, is it. There are many who the IPCC include in that number who have come out and said that that is not what they themselves believe or concluded. When some complained to the IPCC that their names were on the report or that they had been included in the numbers the IPCC simply said that they were justified in including them because they had either been on the committee, been called by the committee to give evidence or that their data had been used by the IPCC in reaching its conclusions; and if they did not like it - basically tough. " But I watched a guy on utube said it was bollocks because the world's always changed over thousands of years... Oh yeah right a guy on utube... He must be right and those 22000 other scientists are all liars after my money... Wait, what's that, aha oh yeah... Oh right I'm just clinically fucking insane burning tyres in my back garden, as that will obviously make my holiday weather better..... "Like I already said, it's not really 22,000 scientist. The 22,000 is basically everybody and anybody that the IPCC had any contact with whether those people actually agreed with the IPCC findings or concluded something different from their own research or were not even scientists but just working in the area of Climate Change and had contact with the IPCC. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"22 thousand climate scientists with expert knowledge, millions of pieces of data, thousands of repeatable experiments, hundreds of the best university's in the world, all totally in agreement about the evidence the method and the solutions. So either 22,000 highly trained scientists from all over the world are colluding in planting evidence, doctoring data and all these people who don't even know each other, are conspiring together in one of the world's most elaborate hoaxs for the purpose of getting more tax!!!!!. Something which every government in the world has been doing anyhow regardless of climate change. But I watched a guy on utube said it was bollocks because the world's always changed over thousands of years... Oh yeah right a guy on utube... He must be right and those 22000 other scientists are all liars after my money... Wait, what's that, aha oh yeah... Oh right I'm just clinically fucking insane burning tyres in my back garden, as that will obviously make my holiday weather better.....
What really muddies the water for some are the leaked e mails from 2009 and 2011, especially the bits about concealing and destroying research so it can't be replicated or tested which is a contradiction of the normal scientific procedure.
There is a lot of mistrust of man made science because of that course of action taken by the people receiving funding.
It would put everything to bed if they started releasing all data so it could be independently tested..
I take it your talking about climategate.
1 guy from Norwich university who attempted to hide data from Chinese weather stations in a 20 year old study that didn't fit in with a particular piece of an experiment.
So this one guy and if I remember correctly his side kick (who was exonerated) , this guy was shopped by fellow climate scientists for his data correction and when he emailed other climate scientists asking them to delete emails and data, they did neither!.
It's hardly Watergate."And 2011. Where they were saying about not disclosing and destroying data. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"22 thousand climate scientists with expert knowledge, millions of pieces of data, thousands of repeatable experiments, hundreds of the best university's in the world, all totally in agreement about the evidence the method and the solutions. So either 22,000 highly trained scientists from all over the world are colluding in planting evidence, doctoring data and all these people who don't even know each other, are conspiring together in one of the world's most elaborate hoaxs for the purpose of getting more tax!!!!!. Something which every government in the world has been doing anyhow regardless of climate change. But I watched a guy on utube said it was bollocks because the world's always changed over thousands of years... Oh yeah right a guy on utube... He must be right and those 22000 other scientists are all liars after my money... Wait, what's that, aha oh yeah... Oh right I'm just clinically fucking insane burning tyres in my back garden, as that will obviously make my holiday weather better.....
What really muddies the water for some are the leaked e mails from 2009 and 2011, especially the bits about concealing and destroying research so it can't be replicated or tested which is a contradiction of the normal scientific procedure.
There is a lot of mistrust of man made science because of that course of action taken by the people receiving funding.
It would put everything to bed if they started releasing all data so it could be independently tested..
I take it your talking about climategate.
1 guy from Norwich university who attempted to hide data from Chinese weather stations in a 20 year old study that didn't fit in with a particular piece of an experiment.
So this one guy and if I remember correctly his side kick (who was exonerated) , this guy was shopped by fellow climate scientists for his data correction and when he emailed other climate scientists asking them to delete emails and data, they did neither!.
It's hardly Watergate.
And 2011. Where they were saying about not disclosing and destroying data.". Yes the point being that none of the colleagues did what they asked them to do. So no mass conspiracy | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"22 thousand climate scientists with expert knowledge, millions of pieces of data, thousands of repeatable experiments, hundreds of the best university's in the world, all totally in agreement about the evidence the method and the solutions. So either 22,000 highly trained scientists from all over the world are colluding in planting evidence, doctoring data and all these people who don't even know each other, are conspiring together in one of the world's most elaborate hoaxs for the purpose of getting more tax!!!!!. Something which every government in the world has been doing anyhow regardless of climate change. But I watched a guy on utube said it was bollocks because the world's always changed over thousands of years... Oh yeah right a guy on utube... He must be right and those 22000 other scientists are all liars after my money... Wait, what's that, aha oh yeah... Oh right I'm just clinically fucking insane burning tyres in my back garden, as that will obviously make my holiday weather better.....
What really muddies the water for some are the leaked e mails from 2009 and 2011, especially the bits about concealing and destroying research so it can't be replicated or tested which is a contradiction of the normal scientific procedure.
There is a lot of mistrust of man made science because of that course of action taken by the people receiving funding.
It would put everything to bed if they started releasing all data so it could be independently tested..
I take it your talking about climategate.
1 guy from Norwich university who attempted to hide data from Chinese weather stations in a 20 year old study that didn't fit in with a particular piece of an experiment.
So this one guy and if I remember correctly his side kick (who was exonerated) , this guy was shopped by fellow climate scientists for his data correction and when he emailed other climate scientists asking them to delete emails and data, they did neither!.
It's hardly Watergate.
And 2011. Where they were saying about not disclosing and destroying data..
Yes the point being that none of the colleagues did what they asked them to do. So no mass conspiracy"Ok, I'm just making a point about why the waters may be muddied a little. Sorry. P.s. The House of Commons report said that data was withheld but Im not privy to all the information,only what I have read and so concede to your expertise. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just for you cracken mate, here's a list of scientific bodies that hold the basic fact in agreement that, humans are affecting climate change Academia Chilena de Ciencias, Chile Academia das Ciencias de Lisboa, Portugal Academia de Ciencias de la República Dominicana Academia de Ciencias Físicas, Matemáticas y Naturales de Venezuela Academia de Ciencias Medicas, Fisicas y Naturales de Guatemala Academia Mexicana de Ciencias,Mexico Academia Nacional de Ciencias de Bolivia Academia Nacional de Ciencias del Peru Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal Académie des Sciences, France Academies of Arts, Humanities and Sciences of Canada Academy of Athens Academy of Science of Mozambique Academy of Science of South Africa Academy of Sciences for the Developing World (TWAS) Academy of Sciences Malaysia Academy of Sciences of Moldova Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic Academy of Sciences of the Islamic Republic of Iran Academy of Scientific Research and Technology, Egypt Academy of the Royal Society of New Zealand Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Italy Africa Centre for Climate and Earth Systems Science African Academy of Sciences Albanian Academy of Sciences Amazon Environmental Research Institute American Academy of Pediatrics American Anthropological Association American Association for the Advancement of Science American Association of State Climatologists (AASC) American Association of Wildlife Veterinarians American Astronomical Society American Chemical Society American College of Preventive Medicine American Fisheries Society American Geophysical Union American Institute of Biological Sciences American Institute of Physics American Meteorological Society American Physical Society American Public Health Association American Quaternary Association American Society for Microbiology American Society of Agronomy American Society of Civil Engineers American Society of Plant Biologists American Statistical Association Association of Ecosystem Research Centers Australian Academy of Science Australian Bureau of Meteorology Australian Coral Reef Society Australian Institute of Marine Science Australian Institute of Physics Australian Marine Sciences Association Australian Medical Association Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society Bangladesh Academy of Sciences Botanical Society of America Brazilian Academy of Sciences British Antarctic Survey Bulgarian Academy of Sciences California Academy of Sciences Cameroon Academy of Sciences Canadian Association of Physicists Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences Canadian Geophysical Union Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society Canadian Society of Soil Science Canadian Society of Zoologists Caribbean Academy of Sciences views Center for International Forestry Research Chinese Academy of Sciences Colombian Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) (Australia) Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research Croatian Academy of Arts and Sciences Crop Science Society of America Cuban Academy of Sciences Delegation of the Finnish Academies of Science and Letters Ecological Society of America Ecological Society of Australia Environmental Protection Agency European Academy of Sciences and Arts European Federation of Geologists European Geosciences Union European Physical Society European Science Foundation Federation of American Scientists French Academy of Sciences Geological Society of America Geological Society of Australia Geological Society of London Georgian Academy of Sciences German Academy of Natural Scientists Leopoldina Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences Indian National Science Academy Indonesian Academy of Sciences Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management Institute of Marine Engineering, Science and Technology Institute of Professional Engineers New Zealand Institution of Mechanical Engineers, UK InterAcademy Council International Alliance of Research Universities International Arctic Science Committee International Association for Great Lakes Research International Council for Science International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences International Research Institute for Climate and Society International Union for Quaternary Research International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics International Union of Pure and Applied Physics Islamic World Academy of Sciences Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities Kenya National Academy of Sciences Korean Academy of Science and Technology Kosovo Academy of Sciences and Arts l'Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal Latin American Academy of Sciences Latvian Academy of Sciences Lithuanian Academy of Sciences Madagascar National Academy of Arts, Letters, and Sciences Mauritius Academy of Science and Technology Montenegrin Academy of Sciences and Arts National Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences, Argentina National Academy of Sciences of Armenia National Academy of Sciences of the Kyrgyz Republic National Academy of Sciences, Sri Lanka National Academy of Sciences, United States of America National Aeronautics and Space Administration National Association of Geoscience Teachers National Association of State Foresters National Center for Atmospheric Research National Council of Engineers Australia National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research, New Zealand National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Research Council National Science Foundation Natural England Natural Environment Research Council, UK Natural Science Collections Alliance Network of African Science Academies New York Academy of Sciences Nicaraguan Academy of Sciences Nigerian Academy of Sciences Norwegian Academy of Sciences and Letters Oklahoma Climatological Survey Organization of Biological Field Stations Pakistan Academy of Sciences Palestine Academy for Science and Technology Pew Center on Global Climate Change Polish Academy of Sciences Romanian Academy Royal Academies for Science and the Arts of Belgium Royal Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences of Spain Royal Astronomical Society, UK Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters Royal Irish Academy Royal Meteorological Society (UK) Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research Royal Scientific Society of Jordan Royal Society of Canada Royal Society of Chemistry, UK Royal Society of the United Kingdom Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences Russian Academy of Sciences Science and Technology, Australia Science Council of Japan Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research Scientific Committee on Solar-Terrestrial Physics Scripps Institution of Oceanography Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts Slovak Academy of Sciences Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts Society for Ecological Restoration International Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics Society of American Foresters Society of Biology (UK) Society of Systematic Biologists Soil Science Society of America Sudan Academy of Sciences Sudanese National Academy of Science Tanzania Academy of Sciences The Wildlife Society (international) Turkish Academy of Sciences Uganda National Academy of Sciences Union of German Academies of Sciences and Humanities United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change University Corporation for Atmospheric Research Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution World Association of Zoos and Aquariums World Federation of Public Health Associations World Forestry Congress World Health Organization World Meteorological Organization Zambia Academy of Sciences Zimbabwe Academy of Sciences" You don't need to convince me. You could call me 'The Skeptical Environmentalist' I'm sure you heard that phrase before. LOL | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why are we to blame for global warming ? Some science programmes I watch state that the planet goes through certain stages every couple of thousand years such as a new ice age which they predict occurs around every 10,000 years. This has nothing to do with us causing it simply the projectory of our planets orbit which every 10,000 years or so is furtherst away from the sun making the planet much much colder, ime still of the mind that blaming us for killing the planet is nothing more than a con designed to fleece us into giving more hard earned cash through stealth taxes. Theres 2 types of scientists the ones that have integrity and the ones that dont. the latter whose scientific research is funded by the politicians ..they say what there political masters tell them to say through fear of if they dont they will have there funding withdrawn. All the scientists that say mankind are killing the planet I take as political scientific spin doctors. In geological terms, the amount of time that humans have been on earth equates to the blink of an eye on a hundred years time span. Within that blink of an eyelid one ten thousandth of that time equates to the period since the industrial revolution. So if you take one ten thousandth of the time of the blink of an eye on an overall time span of a hundred years. That amount of time is changing the planet more than ever before? I don't buy it. Global warming is a fact of life. Man made global warming is a con and my personal carbon footprint is testament to the fact that I don't buy it. Five long haul flights already booked for this year and four European flights. Eat my Fucking carbon Greenies "In geological terms the human race is insignificant. The earth was here long before us and will be long after us. Humanity can either choose to conserve the quality of the environment or crap all over it. If we choose the latter it's humanity that suffer. The planet won't give a toss. It's our quality of life that gets destroyed if we poison and pollute the planet and waste and destroy its resources. Mankind has been very effective at ruining its own environment. I liked your idea that we've only been around for a short time so can't do any lasting damage. Unfortunately the damage depends on how effective we are at doing it not how long we do it. As an analogy consider a person who holds a gun to his head and fires. He may have lived for 50 years but in less than a millisecond he can destroy his life. Just because we're here for a short period in geological time, it doesn't mean we can't, in that time, destroy the environment that keeps us alive. We as a species are very good at that. People can bury their heads in the sand. Or hide behind the smoke of burning tyres if that's what gives them a cheap laugh, but it's your children and grandchildren that will suffer. Are you going anywhere nice on those flights? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just for you cracken mate, here's a list of scientific bodies that hold the basic fact in agreement that, humans are affecting climate change Academia Chilena de Ciencias, Chile Academia das Ciencias de Lisboa, Portugal Academia de Ciencias de la República Dominicana Academia de Ciencias Físicas, Matemáticas y Naturales de Venezuela Academia de Ciencias Medicas, Fisicas y Naturales de Guatemala Academia Mexicana de Ciencias,Mexico Academia Nacional de Ciencias de Bolivia Academia Nacional de Ciencias del Peru Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal Académie des Sciences, France Academies of Arts, Humanities and Sciences of Canada Academy of Athens Academy of Science of Mozambique Academy of Science of South Africa Academy of Sciences for the Developing World (TWAS) Academy of Sciences Malaysia Academy of Sciences of Moldova Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic Academy of Sciences of the Islamic Republic of Iran Academy of Scientific Research and Technology, Egypt Academy of the Royal Society of New Zealand Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Italy Africa Centre for Climate and Earth Systems Science African Academy of Sciences Albanian Academy of Sciences Amazon Environmental Research Institute American Academy of Pediatrics American Anthropological Association American Association for the Advancement of Science American Association of State Climatologists (AASC) American Association of Wildlife Veterinarians American Astronomical Society American Chemical Society American College of Preventive Medicine American Fisheries Society American Geophysical Union American Institute of Biological Sciences American Institute of Physics American Meteorological Society American Physical Society American Public Health Association American Quaternary Association American Society for Microbiology American Society of Agronomy American Society of Civil Engineers American Society of Plant Biologists American Statistical Association Association of Ecosystem Research Centers Australian Academy of Science Australian Bureau of Meteorology Australian Coral Reef Society Australian Institute of Marine Science Australian Institute of Physics Australian Marine Sciences Association Australian Medical Association Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society Bangladesh Academy of Sciences Botanical Society of America Brazilian Academy of Sciences British Antarctic Survey Bulgarian Academy of Sciences California Academy of Sciences Cameroon Academy of Sciences Canadian Association of Physicists Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences Canadian Geophysical Union Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society Canadian Society of Soil Science Canadian Society of Zoologists Caribbean Academy of Sciences views Center for International Forestry Research Chinese Academy of Sciences Colombian Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) (Australia) Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research Croatian Academy of Arts and Sciences Crop Science Society of America Cuban Academy of Sciences Delegation of the Finnish Academies of Science and Letters Ecological Society of America Ecological Society of Australia Environmental Protection Agency European Academy of Sciences and Arts European Federation of Geologists European Geosciences Union European Physical Society European Science Foundation Federation of American Scientists French Academy of Sciences Geological Society of America Geological Society of Australia Geological Society of London Georgian Academy of Sciences German Academy of Natural Scientists Leopoldina Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences Indian National Science Academy Indonesian Academy of Sciences Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management Institute of Marine Engineering, Science and Technology Institute of Professional Engineers New Zealand Institution of Mechanical Engineers, UK InterAcademy Council International Alliance of Research Universities International Arctic Science Committee International Association for Great Lakes Research International Council for Science International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences International Research Institute for Climate and Society International Union for Quaternary Research International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics International Union of Pure and Applied Physics Islamic World Academy of Sciences Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities Kenya National Academy of Sciences Korean Academy of Science and Technology Kosovo Academy of Sciences and Arts l'Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal Latin American Academy of Sciences Latvian Academy of Sciences Lithuanian Academy of Sciences Madagascar National Academy of Arts, Letters, and Sciences Mauritius Academy of Science and Technology Montenegrin Academy of Sciences and Arts National Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences, Argentina National Academy of Sciences of Armenia National Academy of Sciences of the Kyrgyz Republic National Academy of Sciences, Sri Lanka National Academy of Sciences, United States of America National Aeronautics and Space Administration National Association of Geoscience Teachers National Association of State Foresters National Center for Atmospheric Research National Council of Engineers Australia National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research, New Zealand National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Research Council National Science Foundation Natural England Natural Environment Research Council, UK Natural Science Collections Alliance Network of African Science Academies New York Academy of Sciences Nicaraguan Academy of Sciences Nigerian Academy of Sciences Norwegian Academy of Sciences and Letters Oklahoma Climatological Survey Organization of Biological Field Stations Pakistan Academy of Sciences Palestine Academy for Science and Technology Pew Center on Global Climate Change Polish Academy of Sciences Romanian Academy Royal Academies for Science and the Arts of Belgium Royal Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences of Spain Royal Astronomical Society, UK Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters Royal Irish Academy Royal Meteorological Society (UK) Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research Royal Scientific Society of Jordan Royal Society of Canada Royal Society of Chemistry, UK Royal Society of the United Kingdom Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences Russian Academy of Sciences Science and Technology, Australia Science Council of Japan Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research Scientific Committee on Solar-Terrestrial Physics Scripps Institution of Oceanography Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts Slovak Academy of Sciences Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts Society for Ecological Restoration International Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics Society of American Foresters Society of Biology (UK) Society of Systematic Biologists Soil Science Society of America Sudan Academy of Sciences Sudanese National Academy of Science Tanzania Academy of Sciences The Wildlife Society (international) Turkish Academy of Sciences Uganda National Academy of Sciences Union of German Academies of Sciences and Humanities United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change University Corporation for Atmospheric Research Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution World Association of Zoos and Aquariums World Federation of Public Health Associations World Forestry Congress World Health Organization World Meteorological Organization Zambia Academy of Sciences Zimbabwe Academy of Sciences" Yeah but this guy in the pub said he overheard his neighbour had seen a fella on youtube say... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just for you cracken mate, here's a list of scientific bodies that hold the basic fact in agreement that, humans are affecting climate change Academia Chilena de Ciencias, Chile Academia das Ciencias de Lisboa, Portugal Academia de Ciencias de la República Dominicana Academia de Ciencias Físicas, Matemáticas y Naturales de Venezuela Academia de Ciencias Medicas, Fisicas y Naturales de Guatemala Academia Mexicana de Ciencias,Mexico Academia Nacional de Ciencias de Bolivia Academia Nacional de Ciencias del Peru Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal Académie des Sciences, France Academies of Arts, Humanities and Sciences of Canada Academy of Athens Academy of Science of Mozambique Academy of Science of South Africa Academy of Sciences for the Developing World (TWAS) Academy of Sciences Malaysia Academy of Sciences of Moldova Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic Academy of Sciences of the Islamic Republic of Iran Academy of Scientific Research and Technology, Egypt Academy of the Royal Society of New Zealand Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Italy Africa Centre for Climate and Earth Systems Science African Academy of Sciences Albanian Academy of Sciences Amazon Environmental Research Institute American Academy of Pediatrics American Anthropological Association American Association for the Advancement of Science American Association of State Climatologists (AASC) American Association of Wildlife Veterinarians American Astronomical Society American Chemical Society American College of Preventive Medicine American Fisheries Society American Geophysical Union American Institute of Biological Sciences American Institute of Physics American Meteorological Society American Physical Society American Public Health Association American Quaternary Association American Society for Microbiology American Society of Agronomy American Society of Civil Engineers American Society of Plant Biologists American Statistical Association Association of Ecosystem Research Centers Australian Academy of Science Australian Bureau of Meteorology Australian Coral Reef Society Australian Institute of Marine Science Australian Institute of Physics Australian Marine Sciences Association Australian Medical Association Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society Bangladesh Academy of Sciences Botanical Society of America Brazilian Academy of Sciences British Antarctic Survey Bulgarian Academy of Sciences California Academy of Sciences Cameroon Academy of Sciences Canadian Association of Physicists Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences Canadian Geophysical Union Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society Canadian Society of Soil Science Canadian Society of Zoologists Caribbean Academy of Sciences views Center for International Forestry Research Chinese Academy of Sciences Colombian Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) (Australia) Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research Croatian Academy of Arts and Sciences Crop Science Society of America Cuban Academy of Sciences Delegation of the Finnish Academies of Science and Letters Ecological Society of America Ecological Society of Australia Environmental Protection Agency European Academy of Sciences and Arts European Federation of Geologists European Geosciences Union European Physical Society European Science Foundation Federation of American Scientists French Academy of Sciences Geological Society of America Geological Society of Australia Geological Society of London Georgian Academy of Sciences German Academy of Natural Scientists Leopoldina Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences Indian National Science Academy Indonesian Academy of Sciences Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management Institute of Marine Engineering, Science and Technology Institute of Professional Engineers New Zealand Institution of Mechanical Engineers, UK InterAcademy Council International Alliance of Research Universities International Arctic Science Committee International Association for Great Lakes Research International Council for Science International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences International Research Institute for Climate and Society International Union for Quaternary Research International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics International Union of Pure and Applied Physics Islamic World Academy of Sciences Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities Kenya National Academy of Sciences Korean Academy of Science and Technology Kosovo Academy of Sciences and Arts l'Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal Latin American Academy of Sciences Latvian Academy of Sciences Lithuanian Academy of Sciences Madagascar National Academy of Arts, Letters, and Sciences Mauritius Academy of Science and Technology Montenegrin Academy of Sciences and Arts National Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences, Argentina National Academy of Sciences of Armenia National Academy of Sciences of the Kyrgyz Republic National Academy of Sciences, Sri Lanka National Academy of Sciences, United States of America National Aeronautics and Space Administration National Association of Geoscience Teachers National Association of State Foresters National Center for Atmospheric Research National Council of Engineers Australia National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research, New Zealand National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Research Council National Science Foundation Natural England Natural Environment Research Council, UK Natural Science Collections Alliance Network of African Science Academies New York Academy of Sciences Nicaraguan Academy of Sciences Nigerian Academy of Sciences Norwegian Academy of Sciences and Letters Oklahoma Climatological Survey Organization of Biological Field Stations Pakistan Academy of Sciences Palestine Academy for Science and Technology Pew Center on Global Climate Change Polish Academy of Sciences Romanian Academy Royal Academies for Science and the Arts of Belgium Royal Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences of Spain Royal Astronomical Society, UK Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters Royal Irish Academy Royal Meteorological Society (UK) Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research Royal Scientific Society of Jordan Royal Society of Canada Royal Society of Chemistry, UK Royal Society of the United Kingdom Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences Russian Academy of Sciences Science and Technology, Australia Science Council of Japan Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research Scientific Committee on Solar-Terrestrial Physics Scripps Institution of Oceanography Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts Slovak Academy of Sciences Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts Society for Ecological Restoration International Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics Society of American Foresters Society of Biology (UK) Society of Systematic Biologists Soil Science Society of America Sudan Academy of Sciences Sudanese National Academy of Science Tanzania Academy of Sciences The Wildlife Society (international) Turkish Academy of Sciences Uganda National Academy of Sciences Union of German Academies of Sciences and Humanities United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change University Corporation for Atmospheric Research Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution World Association of Zoos and Aquariums World Federation of Public Health Associations World Forestry Congress World Health Organization World Meteorological Organization Zambia Academy of Sciences Zimbabwe Academy of Sciences Yeah but this guy in the pub said he overheard his neighbour had seen a fella on youtube say..." Fuck. Now you know I have to go through every single one and check that you're telling us the truth, don't you? This OCD will be the death of me. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just for you cracken mate, here's a list of scientific bodies that hold the basic fact in agreement that, humans are affecting climate change Academia Chilena de Ciencias, Chile Academia das Ciencias de Lisboa, Portugal Academia de Ciencias de la República Dominicana Academia de Ciencias Físicas, Matemáticas y Naturales de Venezuela Academia de Ciencias Medicas, Fisicas y Naturales de Guatemala Academia Mexicana de Ciencias,Mexico Academia Nacional de Ciencias de Bolivia Academia Nacional de Ciencias del Peru Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal Académie des Sciences, France Academies of Arts, Humanities and Sciences of Canada Academy of Athens Academy of Science of Mozambique Academy of Science of South Africa Academy of Sciences for the Developing World (TWAS) Academy of Sciences Malaysia Academy of Sciences of Moldova Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic Academy of Sciences of the Islamic Republic of Iran Academy of Scientific Research and Technology, Egypt Academy of the Royal Society of New Zealand Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Italy Africa Centre for Climate and Earth Systems Science African Academy of Sciences Albanian Academy of Sciences Amazon Environmental Research Institute American Academy of Pediatrics American Anthropological Association American Association for the Advancement of Science American Association of State Climatologists (AASC) American Association of Wildlife Veterinarians American Astronomical Society American Chemical Society American College of Preventive Medicine American Fisheries Society American Geophysical Union American Institute of Biological Sciences American Institute of Physics American Meteorological Society American Physical Society American Public Health Association American Quaternary Association American Society for Microbiology American Society of Agronomy American Society of Civil Engineers American Society of Plant Biologists American Statistical Association Association of Ecosystem Research Centers Australian Academy of Science Australian Bureau of Meteorology Australian Coral Reef Society Australian Institute of Marine Science Australian Institute of Physics Australian Marine Sciences Association Australian Medical Association Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society Bangladesh Academy of Sciences Botanical Society of America Brazilian Academy of Sciences British Antarctic Survey Bulgarian Academy of Sciences California Academy of Sciences Cameroon Academy of Sciences Canadian Association of Physicists Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences Canadian Geophysical Union Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society Canadian Society of Soil Science Canadian Society of Zoologists Caribbean Academy of Sciences views Center for International Forestry Research Chinese Academy of Sciences Colombian Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) (Australia) Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research Croatian Academy of Arts and Sciences Crop Science Society of America Cuban Academy of Sciences Delegation of the Finnish Academies of Science and Letters Ecological Society of America Ecological Society of Australia Environmental Protection Agency European Academy of Sciences and Arts European Federation of Geologists European Geosciences Union European Physical Society European Science Foundation Federation of American Scientists French Academy of Sciences Geological Society of America Geological Society of Australia Geological Society of London Georgian Academy of Sciences German Academy of Natural Scientists Leopoldina Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences Indian National Science Academy Indonesian Academy of Sciences Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management Institute of Marine Engineering, Science and Technology Institute of Professional Engineers New Zealand Institution of Mechanical Engineers, UK InterAcademy Council International Alliance of Research Universities International Arctic Science Committee International Association for Great Lakes Research International Council for Science International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences International Research Institute for Climate and Society International Union for Quaternary Research International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics International Union of Pure and Applied Physics Islamic World Academy of Sciences Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities Kenya National Academy of Sciences Korean Academy of Science and Technology Kosovo Academy of Sciences and Arts l'Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal Latin American Academy of Sciences Latvian Academy of Sciences Lithuanian Academy of Sciences Madagascar National Academy of Arts, Letters, and Sciences Mauritius Academy of Science and Technology Montenegrin Academy of Sciences and Arts National Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences, Argentina National Academy of Sciences of Armenia National Academy of Sciences of the Kyrgyz Republic National Academy of Sciences, Sri Lanka National Academy of Sciences, United States of America National Aeronautics and Space Administration National Association of Geoscience Teachers National Association of State Foresters National Center for Atmospheric Research National Council of Engineers Australia National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research, New Zealand National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Research Council National Science Foundation Natural England Natural Environment Research Council, UK Natural Science Collections Alliance Network of African Science Academies New York Academy of Sciences Nicaraguan Academy of Sciences Nigerian Academy of Sciences Norwegian Academy of Sciences and Letters Oklahoma Climatological Survey Organization of Biological Field Stations Pakistan Academy of Sciences Palestine Academy for Science and Technology Pew Center on Global Climate Change Polish Academy of Sciences Romanian Academy Royal Academies for Science and the Arts of Belgium Royal Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences of Spain Royal Astronomical Society, UK Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters Royal Irish Academy Royal Meteorological Society (UK) Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research Royal Scientific Society of Jordan Royal Society of Canada Royal Society of Chemistry, UK Royal Society of the United Kingdom Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences Russian Academy of Sciences Science and Technology, Australia Science Council of Japan Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research Scientific Committee on Solar-Terrestrial Physics Scripps Institution of Oceanography Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts Slovak Academy of Sciences Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts Society for Ecological Restoration International Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics Society of American Foresters Society of Biology (UK) Society of Systematic Biologists Soil Science Society of America Sudan Academy of Sciences Sudanese National Academy of Science Tanzania Academy of Sciences The Wildlife Society (international) Turkish Academy of Sciences Uganda National Academy of Sciences Union of German Academies of Sciences and Humanities United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change University Corporation for Atmospheric Research Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution World Association of Zoos and Aquariums World Federation of Public Health Associations World Forestry Congress World Health Organization World Meteorological Organization Zambia Academy of Sciences Zimbabwe Academy of Sciences Yeah but this guy in the pub said he overheard his neighbour had seen a fella on youtube say..." What? What did he say? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ok, lets not all repeat that very, very long list in all the posts please. I'm getting repetitive strain scrolling through already. "Just don't print it out. We need to conserve paper. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just for you cracken mate, here's a list of scientific bodies that hold the basic fact in agreement that, humans are affecting climate change Academia Chilena de Ciencias, Chile Academia das Ciencias de Lisboa, Portugal Academia de Ciencias de la República Dominicana Academia de Ciencias Físicas, Matemáticas y Naturales de Venezuela Academia de Ciencias Medicas, Fisicas y Naturales de Guatemala Academia Mexicana de Ciencias,Mexico Academia Nacional de Ciencias de Bolivia Academia Nacional de Ciencias del Peru Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal Académie des Sciences, France Academies of Arts, Humanities and Sciences of Canada Academy of Athens Academy of Science of Mozambique Academy of Science of South Africa Academy of Sciences for the Developing World (TWAS) Academy of Sciences Malaysia Academy of Sciences of Moldova Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic Academy of Sciences of the Islamic Republic of Iran Academy of Scientific Research and Technology, Egypt Academy of the Royal Society of New Zealand Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Italy Africa Centre for Climate and Earth Systems Science African Academy of Sciences Albanian Academy of Sciences Amazon Environmental Research Institute American Academy of Pediatrics American Anthropological Association American Association for the Advancement of Science American Association of State Climatologists (AASC) American Association of Wildlife Veterinarians American Astronomical Society American Chemical Society American College of Preventive Medicine American Fisheries Society American Geophysical Union American Institute of Biological Sciences American Institute of Physics American Meteorological Society American Physical Society American Public Health Association American Quaternary Association American Society for Microbiology American Society of Agronomy American Society of Civil Engineers American Society of Plant Biologists American Statistical Association Association of Ecosystem Research Centers Australian Academy of Science Australian Bureau of Meteorology Australian Coral Reef Society Australian Institute of Marine Science Australian Institute of Physics Australian Marine Sciences Association Australian Medical Association Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society Bangladesh Academy of Sciences Botanical Society of America Brazilian Academy of Sciences British Antarctic Survey Bulgarian Academy of Sciences California Academy of Sciences Cameroon Academy of Sciences Canadian Association of Physicists Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences Canadian Geophysical Union Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society Canadian Society of Soil Science Canadian Society of Zoologists Caribbean Academy of Sciences views Center for International Forestry Research Chinese Academy of Sciences Colombian Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) (Australia) Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research Croatian Academy of Arts and Sciences Crop Science Society of America Cuban Academy of Sciences Delegation of the Finnish Academies of Science and Letters Ecological Society of America Ecological Society of Australia Environmental Protection Agency European Academy of Sciences and Arts European Federation of Geologists European Geosciences Union European Physical Society European Science Foundation Federation of American Scientists French Academy of Sciences Geological Society of America Geological Society of Australia Geological Society of London Georgian Academy of Sciences German Academy of Natural Scientists Leopoldina Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences Indian National Science Academy Indonesian Academy of Sciences Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management Institute of Marine Engineering, Science and Technology Institute of Professional Engineers New Zealand Institution of Mechanical Engineers, UK InterAcademy Council International Alliance of Research Universities International Arctic Science Committee International Association for Great Lakes Research International Council for Science International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences International Research Institute for Climate and Society International Union for Quaternary Research International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics International Union of Pure and Applied Physics Islamic World Academy of Sciences Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities Kenya National Academy of Sciences Korean Academy of Science and Technology Kosovo Academy of Sciences and Arts l'Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal Latin American Academy of Sciences Latvian Academy of Sciences Lithuanian Academy of Sciences Madagascar National Academy of Arts, Letters, and Sciences Mauritius Academy of Science and Technology Montenegrin Academy of Sciences and Arts National Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences, Argentina National Academy of Sciences of Armenia National Academy of Sciences of the Kyrgyz Republic National Academy of Sciences, Sri Lanka National Academy of Sciences, United States of America National Aeronautics and Space Administration National Association of Geoscience Teachers National Association of State Foresters National Center for Atmospheric Research National Council of Engineers Australia National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research, New Zealand National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Research Council National Science Foundation Natural England Natural Environment Research Council, UK Natural Science Collections Alliance Network of African Science Academies New York Academy of Sciences Nicaraguan Academy of Sciences Nigerian Academy of Sciences Norwegian Academy of Sciences and Letters Oklahoma Climatological Survey Organization of Biological Field Stations Pakistan Academy of Sciences Palestine Academy for Science and Technology Pew Center on Global Climate Change Polish Academy of Sciences Romanian Academy Royal Academies for Science and the Arts of Belgium Royal Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences of Spain Royal Astronomical Society, UK Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters Royal Irish Academy Royal Meteorological Society (UK) Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research Royal Scientific Society of Jordan Royal Society of Canada Royal Society of Chemistry, UK Royal Society of the United Kingdom Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences Russian Academy of Sciences Science and Technology, Australia Science Council of Japan Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research Scientific Committee on Solar-Terrestrial Physics Scripps Institution of Oceanography Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts Slovak Academy of Sciences Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts Society for Ecological Restoration International Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics Society of American Foresters Society of Biology (UK) Society of Systematic Biologists Soil Science Society of America Sudan Academy of Sciences Sudanese National Academy of Science Tanzania Academy of Sciences The Wildlife Society (international) Turkish Academy of Sciences Uganda National Academy of Sciences Union of German Academies of Sciences and Humanities United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change University Corporation for Atmospheric Research Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution World Association of Zoos and Aquariums World Federation of Public Health Associations World Forestry Congress World Health Organization World Meteorological Organization Zambia Academy of Sciences Zimbabwe Academy of Sciences Yeah but this guy in the pub said he overheard his neighbour had seen a fella on youtube say... What? What did he say?" He said "it's all a load of bollocks mate, anyway here's how to build your own flood defense". | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well you say all this Sexy-Bum but that's just not what actually happened. The Cambridge Research Unit incident was far more serious than you make out, as shown in this link from The Telegraph http://www.fabswingers.com/mb/Reply.aspx?MessageID=6947744&MessageGUID=a9e7e923-8375-4d3e-b969-a7ef8bf733a6 Which contains links to further backing stories, if you don't fully trust The Telegraph. And more and more climate scientists are getting together to refute the claims of the IPCC as shown in this link from forbes http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/03/31/the-ipccs-latest-report-deliberately-excludes-and-misrepresents-important-climate-science/ The reality is that it's just not all as cut-and-tried as the environmental lobby and the IPCC (who would not exist at all if it was not for the climate scare) would like to have us all believe. " . I wouldn't deny there isn't disagreement in the ipcc conclusion but and it's s big but. Have you ever seen 22 people completely agree about something on here  .... Now imagine trying to write a conclusion on 14,000 peer reviewed papers, that 22,000 people completely and utterly agree on.
Never going to happen is it... Honestly.
So we're back to the where do the majority hedge towards.
Man made climate change is real
Man made climate change will have dramatic effects to the world within 50 years.
That's the overall consensus | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ok, lets not all repeat that very, very long list in all the posts please. I'm getting repetitive strain scrolling through already. ". I should have printed the anti climate change bodies... It's here to Here | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well you say all this Sexy-Bum but that's just not what actually happened. The Cambridge Research Unit incident was far more serious than you make out, as shown in this link from The Telegraph http://www.fabswingers.com/mb/Reply.aspx?MessageID=6947744&MessageGUID=a9e7e923-8375-4d3e-b969-a7ef8bf733a6 Which contains links to further backing stories, if you don't fully trust The Telegraph. And more and more climate scientists are getting together to refute the claims of the IPCC as shown in this link from forbes http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/03/31/the-ipccs-latest-report-deliberately-excludes-and-misrepresents-important-climate-science/ The reality is that it's just not all as cut-and-tried as the environmental lobby and the IPCC (who would not exist at all if it was not for the climate scare) would like to have us all believe. . I wouldn't deny there isn't disagreement in the ipcc conclusion but and it's s big but. Have you ever seen 22 people completely agree about something on here .... Now imagine trying to write a conclusion on 14,000 peer reviewed papers, that 22,000 people completely and utterly agree on.
Never going to happen is it... Honestly.
So we're back to the where do the majority hedge towards.
Man made climate change is real
Man made climate change will have dramatic effects to the world within 50 years.
That's the overall consensus"Global Warming may not be bollocks. Man made Global Warming may not be bollocks. But IPCC's 22,000 is total bollocks. They have not just taken the hedge, they have totally miss represented many people who they claimed, and still claim, agree with their findings and that brings everything else they say into question as far as I am concerned. At lets not forget, taking action against Global warning is not a NIL cost option either here or in the developing world. The cost of any action has to compared against the cost of inaction. But inaction is not in the IPCCs or the environmentalist lobby's best interests. So there is a monetary bias in their favour to encourage action and to encourage action they have to make out the problem is going to really, really serious. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well you say all this Sexy-Bum but that's just not what actually happened. The Cambridge Research Unit incident was far more serious than you make out, as shown in this link from The Telegraph http://www.fabswingers.com/mb/Reply.aspx?MessageID=6947744&MessageGUID=a9e7e923-8375-4d3e-b969-a7ef8bf733a6 Which contains links to further backing stories, if you don't fully trust The Telegraph. And more and more climate scientists are getting together to refute the claims of the IPCC as shown in this link from forbes http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/03/31/the-ipccs-latest-report-deliberately-excludes-and-misrepresents-important-climate-science/ The reality is that it's just not all as cut-and-tried as the environmental lobby and the IPCC (who would not exist at all if it was not for the climate scare) would like to have us all believe. " . Global warning is great for all those researchers who attempt to panic us with biased reports . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well you say all this Sexy-Bum but that's just not what actually happened. The Cambridge Research Unit incident was far more serious than you make out, as shown in this link from The Telegraph http://www.fabswingers.com/mb/Reply.aspx?MessageID=6947744&MessageGUID=a9e7e923-8375-4d3e-b969-a7ef8bf733a6 Which contains links to further backing stories, if you don't fully trust The Telegraph. And more and more climate scientists are getting together to refute the claims of the IPCC as shown in this link from forbes http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/03/31/the-ipccs-latest-report-deliberately-excludes-and-misrepresents-important-climate-science/ The reality is that it's just not all as cut-and-tried as the environmental lobby and the IPCC (who would not exist at all if it was not for the climate scare) would like to have us all believe. . Global warning is great for all those researchers who attempt to panic us with biased reports . " Well they have to justify their outrageous funding somehow. I see a perfect target for austerity cuts here. The amount of grants and other ways of funding that these organisations get are outrageous. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My God it's the tinfoil hat brigade in the 21st century. What shall we deny next.... The moon landings maybe or perhaps the holocaust!! " I think it's very questionable just who is actually wearing the tinfoil hat on this. Questioning the conclusions of the IPCC is what any reasonable person should do. It's not any form of denial. You can only deny a believe, not a fact. The very fact that those that BELIEVE what the IPCC says as gospel use the term 'climate change deniers' almost suggests that they know it's not real science or totally based on unbiased fact. What are they going to call us next? Scientific heretics. I think it's actually you who needs to open your eyes and follow the cash on this one. There are a lot of people making very big money out of this climate scare. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My God it's the tinfoil hat brigade in the 21st century. What shall we deny next.... The moon landings maybe or perhaps the holocaust!! I think it's very questionable just who is actually wearing the tinfoil hat on this. Questioning the conclusions of the IPCC is what any reasonable person should do. It's not any form of denial. You can only deny a believe, not a fact. The very fact that those that BELIEVE what the IPCC says as gospel use the term 'climate change deniers' almost suggests that they know it's not real science or totally based on unbiased fact. What are they going to call us next? Scientific heretics. I think it's actually you who needs to open your eyes and follow the cash on this one. There are a lot of people making very big money out of this climate scare." Not least German windmill manufacturers. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"My God it's the tinfoil hat brigade in the 21st century. What shall we deny next.... The moon landings maybe or perhaps the holocaust!! I think it's very questionable just who is actually wearing the tinfoil hat on this. Questioning the conclusions of the IPCC is what any reasonable person should do. It's not any form of denial. You can only deny a believe, not a fact. The very fact that those that BELIEVE what the IPCC says as gospel use the term 'climate change deniers' almost suggests that they know it's not real science or totally based on unbiased fact. What are they going to call us next? Scientific heretics. I think it's actually you who needs to open your eyes and follow the cash on this one. There are a lot of people making very big money out of this climate scare." .omg my friend I have alot of time for your posts but on this one... Well I'm not going to bother. There is 14,000 peer reviewed scientific repeatable papers showing conclusive proof in man made climate change, arguing over the wording of the ipcc text is pointless, I've already been through that already. You are a scientific heretic I'm afraid. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The IPCC is simply not fit for purpose. Supposedly independant and scientific based - this clearly is not the case. Up until two days ago, Rajendra Pachauri was Chairman of the IPCC. He resigned on the 24th Feb and his resignation letter contained the following statement... 'For me the protection of Planet Earth, the survival of all species and sustainability of our ecosystems is more than a mission. It is my religion and my dharma.' The direction of the IPCC cannot be impartial if it has been lead by a person who was engaged in a personal crusade. It is this kind of thing that causes massive doubt amongst ordinary people. An open and questioning mind is surely a basic requirement of impartiality?" . Many people come on here another time and big up Stephen hawking or Brian cox or any other number of brilliant scientific minds for their genius, but when these brilliant minds say the science is conclusive and that man made climate change is occurring.. Their now idiots with a personal crusade and no idea about science. Again thousands and thousand of peer reviewed papers proving conclusively that it's occurring. Can you find me one that shows that it isn't. Exactly what are you openly questioning. Upto now I've had random blatherings about ipcc text, fracking, 26 scientists who disagree with the wording of the document, 2 in Norwich who hid data and emails. But no science.... Refute the science, it's there, it's free to read, read it and find fault with its prognosis. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The IPCC is simply not fit for purpose. Supposedly independant and scientific based - this clearly is not the case. Up until two days ago, Rajendra Pachauri was Chairman of the IPCC. He resigned on the 24th Feb and his resignation letter contained the following statement... 'For me the protection of Planet Earth, the survival of all species and sustainability of our ecosystems is more than a mission. It is my religion and my dharma.' The direction of the IPCC cannot be impartial if it has been lead by a person who was engaged in a personal crusade. It is this kind of thing that causes massive doubt amongst ordinary people. An open and questioning mind is surely a basic requirement of impartiality?"  this | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Personally I think that the Green Party need to set up shop in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Russia and most of the other oil producing nations. Once they have that lot on side we could possible tolerate their meaningless drivel here. Until the oil producers are governed by Green politics the Green Party is --- quite frankly - just a bit of nonsense.. Those 4 countries only use 10% of the oil. That's why it's targeted at the users not the sellers. Europe and the US use somewhere in the region of 50%. So set up in India and China then? Lets see some Green politics in China and then come back and make the cataclysmic changes in this country that will send us back to the dark ages all for the sake of a microscopic effect on the planets environment. Our output is an irrelevance in the greater scheme of things. The Greens just target mature and complacent societies for the sake of an easy ride. That means that they have no conviction whatsoever in their policies because they wont set up anywhere where they are likely to be given a clip around the ear (at least)." And you don't think enviromentalists actually exist in India and China? They just have same problems that the green party gas over here. As well as the fact Your not going to get any green party politicians in China are you? For the same reason you won't get a monster raving Looney or s tory party. There is only one party! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I see nothing but a Left wing conspiracy to keep hold of a cash cow. " . I think your saying stupid things for the sake of saying stupid things.... Either that or your stupid. Either way that's why I've not even bothered refuting your remarks | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I see nothing but a Left wing conspiracy to keep hold of a cash cow. . I think your saying stupid things for the sake of saying stupid things.... Either that or your stupid. Either way that's why I've not even bothered refuting your remarks "Neither I'm adding a different perspective from people who are fed up with having a green agenda shoved down their throats. I believe that it's an exaggerated concept that's force fed to people to justify the ludicrous costs and because is seen as being on trend. I believe strongly in conservation but also progress such as sensitive resource extraction and believe Fracking to be a very good idea and something we should commit to if done appropriately. Once it gets the go ahead I would be happy to invest in it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Insulting someone on the forum usually results in a ban. If that had been directed at me, I would have reported the post. " If people resort to name calling it's normally a reflection on self. Unaffected. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Insulting someone on the forum usually results in a ban. If that had been directed at me, I would have reported the post. " . I'm not really insulting I just don't know how else to describe the post of burning tyres in your back garden to encourage climate change as anything but stupid. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Insulting someone on the forum usually results in a ban. If that had been directed at me, I would have reported the post. . I'm not really insulting I just don't know how else to describe the post of burning tyres in your back garden to encourage climate change as anything but stupid. "The very fact you picked up on that as gospel further down from when it was posted again is a reflection on you being unable to see the post for what it was a tongue in cheek remark. I can't burn tyres in my back garden anyway it would upset the neighbours. Up the stables maybe............ | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I see nothing but a Left wing conspiracy to keep hold of a cash cow. . I think your saying stupid things for the sake of saying stupid things.... Either that or your stupid. Either way that's why I've not even bothered refuting your remarks "And this is the real problem with the Green movement; rather than rebut criticism of what they claim they prefer to ridicule and try to discredit their opponents. I don't think they realise how much harm this approach actually does to their own credibility and the environmental cause itself. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Insulting someone on the forum usually results in a ban. If that had been directed at me, I would have reported the post. . I'm not really insulting I just don't know how else to describe the post of burning tyres in your back garden to encourage climate change as anything but stupid. "Bad humour maybe? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I see nothing but a Left wing conspiracy to keep hold of a cash cow. . I think your saying stupid things for the sake of saying stupid things.... Either that or your stupid. Either way that's why I've not even bothered refuting your remarks
And this is the real problem with the Green movement; rather than rebut criticism of what they claim they prefer to ridicule and try to discredit their opponents. I don't think they realise how much harm this approach actually does to their own credibility and the environmental cause itself.
"I did not insult the author of those comments on a personal level. Rather expressed differing opinions to theirs on the subject. And the response highlights your points exactly. Deflection and insults seem to be the order of the day. And if that does not work then claim you have a bad cold! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"ime a bit confused here is there any point to them at all. With regards to saving the planet well the planets been around billions of years before we humans formed. Prior to our arrival Earths gone through thousands of super volcano eruptions., Earthquakes and other natural catastrphes and.. survived just fine all on its own. How exactly is recycling and not using plastic shopping bags going to save the planet exactly ?? As for windfarms creating electricity well I think its been proven that there productivity equates to about as much use as a fart in a wind tunnel. Then theres the antifrackers what exactly are they protesting against all I can see is not having cheaper energy bills. Maybe if they got a job and had to pay there own way they would instead welcome cheaper energy bills. As for fracking creates earhquakes just usual scaremongering wheres the facts ?? . Were not trying to save the planet. Were trying to save you. I often wonder why though
like the planet ime perfectly capable of saving myself thanks .
Your obviously not.
You can't even be arsed to read the report by the fracking company that stated, they caused the the fucking earthquakes with fracking.
PS the planets got 5 billion years before the sun swallows it up.
Depleted uraniums half life is about 5 billion years.
That's means we've polluted the planet with it...... Forever!
5 billion years before the sun dies ..hows that our fault exactly ? The sun is a star and destined to die an implode at some time, not sure if yr aware bur even stars don't live forever. 5 billion years if were lucky enough to avoid large meteor colliions in the meantime.
The report by the fracking company you refer to. Whats the report called and whats the name of the fracking company you wouldn't be trying to put the willie up me now with yr scaremongering wud ya "Well said.... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I see nothing but a Left wing conspiracy to keep hold of a cash cow. . I think your saying stupid things for the sake of saying stupid things.... Either that or your stupid. Either way that's why I've not even bothered refuting your remarks
And this is the real problem with the Green movement; rather than rebut criticism of what they claim they prefer to ridicule and try to discredit their opponents. I don't think they realise how much harm this approach actually does to their own credibility and the environmental cause itself.
I did not insult the author of those comments on a personal level. Rather expressed differing opinions to theirs on the subject.
And the response highlights your points exactly. Deflection and insults seem to be the order of the day. And if that does not work then claim you have a bad cold! ". Burning tyres is an illegal act. I really can't describe it as anything but stupid. As for people who deride a person for saying an illegal act is stupid well, that speaks for itself | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The IPCC is simply not fit for purpose. Supposedly independant and scientific based - this clearly is not the case. Up until two days ago, Rajendra Pachauri was Chairman of the IPCC. He resigned on the 24th Feb and his resignation letter contained the following statement... 'For me the protection of Planet Earth, the survival of all species and sustainability of our ecosystems is more than a mission. It is my religion and my dharma.' The direction of the IPCC cannot be impartial if it has been lead by a person who was engaged in a personal crusade. It is this kind of thing that causes massive doubt amongst ordinary people. An open and questioning mind is surely a basic requirement of impartiality?. Many people come on here another time and big up Stephen hawking or Brian cox or any other number of brilliant scientific minds for their genius, but when these brilliant minds say the science is conclusive and that man made climate change is occurring.. Their now idiots with a personal crusade and no idea about science. Again thousands and thousand of peer reviewed papers proving conclusively that it's occurring. Can you find me one that shows that it isn't. Exactly what are you openly questioning. Upto now I've had random blatherings about ipcc text, fracking, 26 scientists who disagree with the wording of the document, 2 in Norwich who hid data and emails. But no science.... Refute the science, it's there, it's free to read, read it and find fault with its prognosis." Again, in order to test a theory the research and data has to be open to all to test it. This is a basic of any scientific theory. As I understand it ( unlike some, I am not privy to all the information) the research and data is withheld and/or destroyed so that it can be tested by no one apart from those on "the approved list" As I say, I may well be wrong as the info is not shared with me but I am merely going on the findings of the House of Commons report. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I see nothing but a Left wing conspiracy to keep hold of a cash cow. . I think your saying stupid things for the sake of saying stupid things.... Either that or your stupid. Either way that's why I've not even bothered refuting your remarks
And this is the real problem with the Green movement; rather than rebut criticism of what they claim they prefer to ridicule and try to discredit their opponents. I don't think they realise how much harm this approach actually does to their own credibility and the environmental cause itself.
I did not insult the author of those comments on a personal level. Rather expressed differing opinions to theirs on the subject.
And the response highlights your points exactly. Deflection and insults seem to be the order of the day. And if that does not work then claim you have a bad cold! .
Burning tyres is an illegal act.
I really can't describe it as anything but stupid.
As for people who deride a person for saying an illegal act is stupid well, that speaks for itself"I think you're missing the point. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I see nothing but a Left wing conspiracy to keep hold of a cash cow. . I think your saying stupid things for the sake of saying stupid things.... Either that or your stupid. Either way that's why I've not even bothered refuting your remarks
And this is the real problem with the Green movement; rather than rebut criticism of what they claim they prefer to ridicule and try to discredit their opponents. I don't think they realise how much harm this approach actually does to their own credibility and the environmental cause itself.
I did not insult the author of those comments on a personal level. Rather expressed differing opinions to theirs on the subject.
And the response highlights your points exactly. Deflection and insults seem to be the order of the day. And if that does not work then claim you have a bad cold! .
Burning tyres is an illegal act.
I really can't describe it as anything but stupid.
As for people who deride a person for saying an illegal act is stupid well, that speaks for itself
I think you're missing the point.". I'm missing the point lol. I call an illegal act stupid and you deride me for it. Your worming your way round trying to get me a bad because your argument makes you look foolish. As you always say. Stick with the point. You've found no scientific evidence against the theory, you've found no scientist who's got a peer reviewed claim against it, you're entire argument rests on some wording in the ipcc report and you advocate the only reason thousands of brilliant scientists like Stephen hawking who said that climate change was the most pressing issue facing the human race..... Is there desperate for more money, the guy is nearly dead worth millions and is willing to ruin his entire career to completely lie about climate change for a mere few quid more. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The IPCC is simply not fit for purpose. Supposedly independant and scientific based - this clearly is not the case. Up until two days ago, Rajendra Pachauri was Chairman of the IPCC. He resigned on the 24th Feb and his resignation letter contained the following statement... 'For me the protection of Planet Earth, the survival of all species and sustainability of our ecosystems is more than a mission. It is my religion and my dharma.' The direction of the IPCC cannot be impartial if it has been lead by a person who was engaged in a personal crusade. It is this kind of thing that causes massive doubt amongst ordinary people. An open and questioning mind is surely a basic requirement of impartiality?. Many people come on here another time and big up Stephen hawking or Brian cox or any other number of brilliant scientific minds for their genius, but when these brilliant minds say the science is conclusive and that man made climate change is occurring.. Their now idiots with a personal crusade and no idea about science. Again thousands and thousand of peer reviewed papers proving conclusively that it's occurring. Can you find me one that shows that it isn't. Exactly what are you openly questioning. Upto now I've had random blatherings about ipcc text, fracking, 26 scientists who disagree with the wording of the document, 2 in Norwich who hid data and emails. But no science.... Refute the science, it's there, it's free to read, read it and find fault with its prognosis. Again, in order to test a theory the research and data has to be open to all to test it. This is a basic of any scientific theory. As I understand it ( unlike some, I am not privy to all the information) the research and data is withheld and/or destroyed so that it can be tested by no one apart from those on "the approved list" As I say, I may well be wrong as the info is not shared with me but I am merely going on the findings of the House of Commons report." . Which data or research would you like! . Nearly all the scientists who work on climate change print their findings in widely available scientific journals. I have most on my shelf at home, if you can't find it online let me know and I will try to pdf it for you | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The IPCC is simply not fit for purpose. Supposedly independant and scientific based - this clearly is not the case. Up until two days ago, Rajendra Pachauri was Chairman of the IPCC. He resigned on the 24th Feb and his resignation letter contained the following statement... 'For me the protection of Planet Earth, the survival of all species and sustainability of our ecosystems is more than a mission. It is my religion and my dharma.' The direction of the IPCC cannot be impartial if it has been lead by a person who was engaged in a personal crusade. It is this kind of thing that causes massive doubt amongst ordinary people. An open and questioning mind is surely a basic requirement of impartiality?. Many people come on here another time and big up Stephen hawking or Brian cox or any other number of brilliant scientific minds for their genius, but when these brilliant minds say the science is conclusive and that man made climate change is occurring.. Their now idiots with a personal crusade and no idea about science. Again thousands and thousand of peer reviewed papers proving conclusively that it's occurring. Can you find me one that shows that it isn't. Exactly what are you openly questioning. Upto now I've had random blatherings about ipcc text, fracking, 26 scientists who disagree with the wording of the document, 2 in Norwich who hid data and emails. But no science.... Refute the science, it's there, it's free to read, read it and find fault with its prognosis. Again, in order to test a theory the research and data has to be open to all to test it. This is a basic of any scientific theory. As I understand it ( unlike some, I am not privy to all the information) the research and data is withheld and/or destroyed so that it can be tested by no one apart from those on "the approved list" As I say, I may well be wrong as the info is not shared with me but I am merely going on the findings of the House of Commons report.. Which data or research would you like! . Nearly all the scientists who work on climate change print their findings in widely available scientific journals. I have most on my shelf at home, if you can't find it online let me know and I will try to pdf it for you" Thanks for that. Any idea how the House of Commons report came to that conclusion since every thing is so easy to come across? Bloody useless mp's! I have just read an interesting article by Theo Vemaelen in the knowledge. I would be interested to hear your thoughts on that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The IPCC is simply not fit for purpose. Supposedly independant and scientific based - this clearly is not the case. Up until two days ago, Rajendra Pachauri was Chairman of the IPCC. He resigned on the 24th Feb and his resignation letter contained the following statement... 'For me the protection of Planet Earth, the survival of all species and sustainability of our ecosystems is more than a mission. It is my religion and my dharma.' The direction of the IPCC cannot be impartial if it has been lead by a person who was engaged in a personal crusade. It is this kind of thing that causes massive doubt amongst ordinary people. An open and questioning mind is surely a basic requirement of impartiality?. Many people come on here another time and big up Stephen hawking or Brian cox or any other number of brilliant scientific minds for their genius, but when these brilliant minds say the science is conclusive and that man made climate change is occurring.. Their now idiots with a personal crusade and no idea about science. Again thousands and thousand of peer reviewed papers proving conclusively that it's occurring. Can you find me one that shows that it isn't. Exactly what are you openly questioning. Upto now I've had random blatherings about ipcc text, fracking, 26 scientists who disagree with the wording of the document, 2 in Norwich who hid data and emails. But no science.... Refute the science, it's there, it's free to read, read it and find fault with its prognosis. Again, in order to test a theory the research and data has to be open to all to test it. This is a basic of any scientific theory. As I understand it ( unlike some, I am not privy to all the information) the research and data is withheld and/or destroyed so that it can be tested by no one apart from those on "the approved list" As I say, I may well be wrong as the info is not shared with me but I am merely going on the findings of the House of Commons report.. Which data or research would you like! . Nearly all the scientists who work on climate change print their findings in widely available scientific journals. I have most on my shelf at home, if you can't find it online let me know and I will try to pdf it for you" It's not the science that is so much in question but the IPCC's conclusions from the the science. This is often not what the scientists themselves concluded from their own research but their names and their research is still included in the IPCC's 22,000. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In common with other elements of the 'progressive left', they would rather stigmatise those who's opinions differ from their own " Oh good grief. Criticising people's opinions is not 'stigmatising'. Why does the right always resort to this argument? Almost like they don't have any actual response to criticism. What exactly is it you want to be able to say that the left is stopping you from? And obviously the right doesn't 'stigmatise'...they just love to portray a positive image of foreign people, poor people, gay people... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I see nothing but a Left wing conspiracy to keep hold of a cash cow. . I think your saying stupid things for the sake of saying stupid things.... Either that or your stupid. Either way that's why I've not even bothered refuting your remarks
And this is the real problem with the Green movement; rather than rebut criticism of what they claim they prefer to ridicule and try to discredit their opponents. I don't think they realise how much harm this approach actually does to their own credibility and the environmental cause itself.
I did not insult the author of those comments on a personal level. Rather expressed differing opinions to theirs on the subject.
And the response highlights your points exactly. Deflection and insults seem to be the order of the day. And if that does not work then claim you have a bad cold! .
Burning tyres is an illegal act.
I really can't describe it as anything but stupid.
As for people who deride a person for saying an illegal act is stupid well, that speaks for itself"Ok your backtracking from what you originally said and now taking the tongue in cheek comments about burning tyres as gospel again. Clinging to it in desperate justification. Desperate justification is the order of the day. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In common with other elements of the 'progressive left', they would rather stigmatise those who's opinions differ from their own Oh good grief. Criticising people's opinions is not 'stigmatising'. Why does the right always resort to this argument? Almost like they don't have any actual response to criticism. What exactly is it you want to be able to say that the left is stopping you from? And obviously the right doesn't 'stigmatise'...they just love to portray a positive image of foreign people, poor people, gay people..." That's all very trite, even if somewhat true on both sides. But on this thread most of the ridiculing and stigmatising has come from the environmentalist side when what we want is engagement and reasoned discussion. Please provide it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't know why we are having this argument anyway because the Green Party will never win a General Election in our lifetime that's for sure. They are doing a Stirling job in Brighton at a local government level as reported. Peace and love people. "From my reply in the other free party thread: " They have been a disaster in Brighton What do you qualify as 'a disaster', and is that from personal experience?. Quite a few strikes from various newspaper reports ." So you don't live or know people in Brighton then?, just repeating what the Murdoch press has told you?. The (mostly male) refuse collectors went on strike in protest at the equalling of allowances with the (mostly female)care workers. Would you class the £64m of inward investment as a disaster too?, Toad Hole Valley?, the town centre redevelopment? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't know why we are having this argument anyway because the Green Party will never win a General Election in our lifetime that's for sure. They are doing a Stirling job in Brighton at a local government level as reported. Peace and love people. "I'd be more than happy to add some CO2 with a trip down to Milton Keynes. We can even burn some tyres together if that what makes you happy. LOL | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't know why we are having this argument anyway because the Green Party will never win a General Election in our lifetime that's for sure. They are doing a Stirling job in Brighton at a local government level as reported. Peace and love people.
From my reply in the other free party thread:
" They have been a disaster in Brighton
What do you qualify as 'a disaster', and is that from personal experience?. Quite a few strikes from various newspaper reports ."
So you don't live or know people in Brighton then?, just repeating what the Murdoch press has told you?. The (mostly male) refuse collectors went on strike in protest at the equalling of allowances with the (mostly female)care workers. Would you class the £64m of inward investment as a disaster too?, Toad Hole Valley?, the town centre redevelopment?"Hi please read my post when I said they are doing a Stirling job?? Is that not praise? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't know why we are having this argument anyway because the Green Party will never win a General Election in our lifetime that's for sure. They are doing a Stirling job in Brighton at a local government level as reported. Peace and love people.
I'd be more than happy to add some CO2 with a trip down to Milton Keynes. We can even burn some tyres together if that what makes you happy. LOL "I will ethically source some. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well you say all this Sexy-Bum but that's just not what actually happened. The Cambridge Research Unit incident was far more serious than you make out, as shown in this link from The Telegraph http://www.fabswingers.com/mb/Reply.aspx?MessageID=6947744&MessageGUID=a9e7e923-8375-4d3e-b969-a7ef8bf733a6 Which contains links to further backing stories, if you don't fully trust The Telegraph. And more and more climate scientists are getting together to refute the claims of the IPCC as shown in this link from forbes http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/03/31/the-ipccs-latest-report-deliberately-excludes-and-misrepresents-important-climate-science/ The reality is that it's just not all as cut-and-tried as the environmental lobby and the IPCC (who would not exist at all if it was not for the climate scare) would like to have us all believe. " . Right your Forbes article is using an alternative body to the ipcc called the nipcc. The nipcc is basically run by the heartland institute. It has 3 main authors, compared to the IPCC 500 authors. It uses contributions from 38 other members, compared to the IPCC 2000. The nipcc contributors are all paid, unlike the IPCC,s which are not paid. The heartland institute is a right wing discredited scientific body which has campaigned on issues of other dispute like smoking not causing cancer. Whales not being engaged Ozone depletion And acid rain. They've received over 28 million dollars in finance by the koch brothers to discredit these and many more. No scientist worth his salt would be seen dead with any of their crazed findings or dodgy science. The koch brothers themselves(they own the second largest privately held firm in change ) have funded various right wing think tanks against climate change and universal health care to the tune of 100 million dollars. So between them and the many many petroleum companies who also fund anti climate change whacko science, I think you'll find there's more money spent fighting climate change then investigating it. By recall I think it's around 10:1 so for every 1 pound spent investigating it in the IPCC there's right wing think tanks spending 10 pounds trying to discredit it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Green Party is a home for left wing extremists. In common with other elements of the 'progressive left', they would rather stigmatise those who's opinions differ from their own, rather than debate on the basis of evidence. The rhetoric and tone shares much with that of another myth adopter, the religious zealot. Both are immune to reason and indeed fact. The theocrat brandishes his religious text, the green ideologue his or her computer models. To argue with either is futile. So vote Green. Get Red. Hardly anyone will of course. " The green party have never hidden their left wing view, there's nothing extreme about social justice and wanting a society built for the benefit of all and not the minority. Given a choice of tory, red tory, racist, or capitulating tory lite the greens offer a real alternative to more of the same. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I don't know what you read but there own seismologist wrote in the report to Blackpool and flyde council that the fracking was responsible for over 1500 mini quakes. Maybe not a big deal if you live 25 miles away, but to those within 3 miles it certainly was. As for cheaper bills, well don't hold your breath, fracked oil and gas is around 5 times more expensive to produce than conventional, hence since the price drop they've all dropped their plans and several in the US and AUS have already gone bust." The dangers are well documented. The companies say they pump in "water" at high pressure - they forget to mention the thousands of gallons of toxic chemicals. http://www.dangersoffracking.com | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't know why we are having this argument anyway because the Green Party will never win a General Election in our lifetime that's for sure. They are doing a Stirling job in Brighton at a local government level as reported. Peace and love people.
From my reply in the other free party thread:
" They have been a disaster in Brighton
What do you qualify as 'a disaster', and is that from personal experience?. Quite a few strikes from various newspaper reports ."
So you don't live or know people in Brighton then?, just repeating what the Murdoch press has told you?. The (mostly male) refuse collectors went on strike in protest at the equalling of allowances with the (mostly female)care workers. Would you class the £64m of inward investment as a disaster too?, Toad Hole Valley?, the town centre redevelopment?"And you know all of this because a) You live over 70 Miles away from Brighton so know exactly what is going on there b) You've made a special effort to find out what's happening in an area that you have no real contact with c) You're an environmentalist who will support what the Green Party do regardless and always paint them in the best possible light d) Other (please specify) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In common with other elements of the 'progressive left', they would rather stigmatise those who's opinions differ from their own Oh good grief. Criticising people's opinions is not 'stigmatising'. Why does the right always resort to this argument? Almost like they don't have any actual response to criticism. What exactly is it you want to be able to say that the left is stopping you from? And obviously the right doesn't 'stigmatise'...they just love to portray a positive image of foreign people, poor people, gay people... That's all very trite, even if somewhat true on both sides. But on this thread most of the ridiculing and stigmatising has come from the environmentalist side when what we want is engagement and reasoned discussion. Please provide it." . Your beginning to look like your losing the plot mate. First you deride me for saying an illegal act is stupid, then you joke about it, you haven't answered a single point out of the many I've put to you, and then you say the typical greens calling people names and not answering any questions. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"d) my sister lives there, visited at Christmas and will again over Easter." I think that would have come under 'c) Other (please specify) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In common with other elements of the 'progressive left', they would rather stigmatise those who's opinions differ from their own Oh good grief. Criticising people's opinions is not 'stigmatising'. Why does the right always resort to this argument? Almost like they don't have any actual response to criticism. What exactly is it you want to be able to say that the left is stopping you from? And obviously the right doesn't 'stigmatise'...they just love to portray a positive image of foreign people, poor people, gay people... That's all very trite, even if somewhat true on both sides. But on this thread most of the ridiculing and stigmatising has come from the environmentalist side when what we want is engagement and reasoned discussion. Please provide it.. Your beginning to look like your losing the plot mate. First you deride me for saying an illegal act is stupid, then you joke about it, you haven't answered a single point out of the many I've put to you, and then you say the typical greens calling people names and not answering any questions. "Lighten up a little. There's always room for a little joke and banter on a swinging site ffs. That is what we're all here for really. Isn't it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I see nothing but a Left wing conspiracy to keep hold of a cash cow. . I think your saying stupid things for the sake of saying stupid things.... Either that or your stupid. Either way that's why I've not even bothered refuting your remarks
And this is the real problem with the Green movement; rather than rebut criticism of what they claim they prefer to ridicule and try to discredit their opponents. I don't think they realise how much harm this approach actually does to their own credibility and the environmental cause itself.
I did not insult the author of those comments on a personal level. Rather expressed differing opinions to theirs on the subject.
And the response highlights your points exactly. Deflection and insults seem to be the order of the day. And if that does not work then claim you have a bad cold! .
Burning tyres is an illegal act.
I really can't describe it as anything but stupid.
As for people who deride a person for saying an illegal act is stupid well, that speaks for itself
Ok your backtracking from what you originally said and now taking the tongue in cheek comments about burning tyres as gospel again. Clinging to it in desperate justification.
Desperate justification is the order of the day. ". My original comment is there for all to see. It's not an insult its incredulity at a post that is trying to encourage an illegal activity which after I pointed out, you then said you were only joking! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Again thousands and thousand of peer reviewed papers proving conclusively that it's occurring. Can you find me one that shows that it isn't. Exactly what are you openly questioning. Upto now I've had random blatherings about ipcc text, fracking, 26 scientists who disagree with the wording of the document, 2 in Norwich who hid data and emails. But no science.... Refute the science, it's there, it's free to read, read it and find fault with its prognosis." Try reading http://www.globalresearch.ca/global-cooling-is-here/10783 and many similar reports. There are many thousands of scientists who disagree with the IPCC's reports. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In common with other elements of the 'progressive left', they would rather stigmatise those who's opinions differ from their own Oh good grief. Criticising people's opinions is not 'stigmatising'. Why does the right always resort to this argument? Almost like they don't have any actual response to criticism. What exactly is it you want to be able to say that the left is stopping you from? And obviously the right doesn't 'stigmatise'...they just love to portray a positive image of foreign people, poor people, gay people... That's all very trite, even if somewhat true on both sides. But on this thread most of the ridiculing and stigmatising has come from the environmentalist side when what we want is engagement and reasoned discussion. Please provide it.. Your beginning to look like your losing the plot mate. First you deride me for saying an illegal act is stupid, then you joke about it, you haven't answered a single point out of the many I've put to you, and then you say the typical greens calling people names and not answering any questions.
Lighten up a little. There's always room for a little joke and banter on a swinging site ffs. That is what we're all here for really. Isn't it? ". I like a laugh and joke with the best but trying to get somebody a ban for what was obviously a bad comment on the other persons fault (illegal activity)  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In common with other elements of the 'progressive left', they would rather stigmatise those who's opinions differ from their own Oh good grief. Criticising people's opinions is not 'stigmatising'. Why does the right always resort to this argument? Almost like they don't have any actual response to criticism. What exactly is it you want to be able to say that the left is stopping you from? And obviously the right doesn't 'stigmatise'...they just love to portray a positive image of foreign people, poor people, gay people... That's all very trite, even if somewhat true on both sides. But on this thread most of the ridiculing and stigmatising has come from the environmentalist side when what we want is engagement and reasoned discussion. Please provide it.. Your beginning to look like your losing the plot mate. First you deride me for saying an illegal act is stupid, then you joke about it, you haven't answered a single point out of the many I've put to you, and then you say the typical greens calling people names and not answering any questions. "Quick question 17 hours ago I joked about burning tyre and let's get this global warming started. You have obviously taken this very seriously and have derided it as an illegal act (luckily an environmental law which nobody cares about) Did you then think I Iogged off here and started to burn tyres in a vain attempt to entice the beach to Peterborough? You seem to take and cherish that tongue in cheek comment very seriously almost clinging to it for succour in a vain attempt to deflect attention from the points made by my new learned friend? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't know why we are having this argument anyway because the Green Party will never win a General Election in our lifetime that's for sure. They are doing a Stirling job in Brighton at a local government level as reported. Peace and love people.
I'd be more than happy to add some CO2 with a trip down to Milton Keynes. We can even burn some tyres together if that what makes you happy. LOL
I will ethically source some. "Nagh. Just get any old ones. Or better still new ones, even more wasteful. I love it when a girl is really naughty. LOL | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Again thousands and thousand of peer reviewed papers proving conclusively that it's occurring. Can you find me one that shows that it isn't. Exactly what are you openly questioning. Upto now I've had random blatherings about ipcc text, fracking, 26 scientists who disagree with the wording of the document, 2 in Norwich who hid data and emails. But no science.... Refute the science, it's there, it's free to read, read it and find fault with its prognosis. Try reading http://www.globalresearch.ca/global-cooling-is-here/10783 and many similar reports. There are many thousands of scientists who disagree with the IPCC's reports." . Michel Chossudovsky who runs that website is an economist?. He's well known for holocaust denial and supporting milosovic in Kosovo. His theorys are full of half baked crap science, assumptions and idiocy | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In common with other elements of the 'progressive left', they would rather stigmatise those who's opinions differ from their own Oh good grief. Criticising people's opinions is not 'stigmatising'. Why does the right always resort to this argument? Almost like they don't have any actual response to criticism. What exactly is it you want to be able to say that the left is stopping you from? And obviously the right doesn't 'stigmatise'...they just love to portray a positive image of foreign people, poor people, gay people... That's all very trite, even if somewhat true on both sides. But on this thread most of the ridiculing and stigmatising has come from the environmentalist side when what we want is engagement and reasoned discussion. Please provide it.. Your beginning to look like your losing the plot mate. First you deride me for saying an illegal act is stupid, then you joke about it, you haven't answered a single point out of the many I've put to you, and then you say the typical greens calling people names and not answering any questions.
Lighten up a little. There's always room for a little joke and banter on a swinging site ffs. That is what we're all here for really. Isn't it? .
I like a laugh and joke with the best but trying to get somebody a ban for what was obviously a bad comment on the other persons fault (illegal activity) "Only one person pointed out that you can get banned for insulting someone on here and the person who you sort of insulted said they did not care. I really don't thing, even if you had been reported and the person you called stupid had cared, that that would have resulted in a ban. I think you'd have to come up with a far worse insult than that to get a ban on here. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In common with other elements of the 'progressive left', they would rather stigmatise those who's opinions differ from their own Oh good grief. Criticising people's opinions is not 'stigmatising'. Why does the right always resort to this argument? Almost like they don't have any actual response to criticism. What exactly is it you want to be able to say that the left is stopping you from? And obviously the right doesn't 'stigmatise'...they just love to portray a positive image of foreign people, poor people, gay people... That's all very trite, even if somewhat true on both sides. But on this thread most of the ridiculing and stigmatising has come from the environmentalist side when what we want is engagement and reasoned discussion. Please provide it.. Your beginning to look like your losing the plot mate. First you deride me for saying an illegal act is stupid, then you joke about it, you haven't answered a single point out of the many I've put to you, and then you say the typical greens calling people names and not answering any questions.
Quick question 17 hours ago I joked about burning tyre and let's get this global warming started.
You have obviously taken this very seriously and have derided it as an illegal act (luckily an environmental law which nobody cares about)
Did you then think I Iogged off here and started to burn tyres in a vain attempt to entice the beach to Peterborough?
You seem to take and cherish that tongue in cheek comment very seriously almost clinging to it for succour in a vain attempt to deflect attention from the points made by my new learned friend?
". I've answered all his points, he's not answered one of mine. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In common with other elements of the 'progressive left', they would rather stigmatise those who's opinions differ from their own Oh good grief. Criticising people's opinions is not 'stigmatising'. Why does the right always resort to this argument? Almost like they don't have any actual response to criticism. What exactly is it you want to be able to say that the left is stopping you from? And obviously the right doesn't 'stigmatise'...they just love to portray a positive image of foreign people, poor people, gay people... That's all very trite, even if somewhat true on both sides. But on this thread most of the ridiculing and stigmatising has come from the environmentalist side when what we want is engagement and reasoned discussion. Please provide it.. Your beginning to look like your losing the plot mate. First you deride me for saying an illegal act is stupid, then you joke about it, you haven't answered a single point out of the many I've put to you, and then you say the typical greens calling people names and not answering any questions.
Lighten up a little. There's always room for a little joke and banter on a swinging site ffs. That is what we're all here for really. Isn't it? .
I like a laugh and joke with the best but trying to get somebody a ban for what was obviously a bad comment on the other persons fault (illegal activity)
Only one person pointed out that you can get banned for insulting someone on here and the person who you sort of insulted said they did not care.
I really don't thing, even if you had been reported and the person you called stupid had cared, that that would have resulted in a ban. I think you'd have to come up with a far worse insult than that to get a ban on here.". Calling somebody stupid for advocating breaking the law is NOT insulting. If I wanted to insult I would have done.... There'd wrote such a load of shite on every post,I could really have ridiculed it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In common with other elements of the 'progressive left', they would rather stigmatise those who's opinions differ from their own Oh good grief. Criticising people's opinions is not 'stigmatising'. Why does the right always resort to this argument? Almost like they don't have any actual response to criticism. What exactly is it you want to be able to say that the left is stopping you from? And obviously the right doesn't 'stigmatise'...they just love to portray a positive image of foreign people, poor people, gay people... That's all very trite, even if somewhat true on both sides. But on this thread most of the ridiculing and stigmatising has come from the environmentalist side when what we want is engagement and reasoned discussion. Please provide it.. Your beginning to look like your losing the plot mate. First you deride me for saying an illegal act is stupid, then you joke about it, you haven't answered a single point out of the many I've put to you, and then you say the typical greens calling people names and not answering any questions.
Lighten up a little. There's always room for a little joke and banter on a swinging site ffs. That is what we're all here for really. Isn't it? .
I like a laugh and joke with the best but trying to get somebody a ban for what was obviously a bad comment on the other persons fault (illegal activity) "I apologise for theoretically burning tyres on the internet. I would like it on record that whilst a beach being situated at Peterborough would be a good idea it may be a negative for anybody living in Norfolk. Although my New Learned friend has not tried to get you banned so please don't cling to that. As once again like the Green Party the facts have become misconstrued. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In common with other elements of the 'progressive left',.. ...There'd wrote such a load of shite on every post,I could really have ridiculed it."  zzzzz Can we move on now please | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Although my New Learned friend has not tried to get you banned so please don't cling to that. As once again like the Green Party the facts have become misconstrued. " Disappointed!! Thought I was your 'New Learned Friend' | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The IPCC is simply not fit for purpose. Supposedly independant and scientific based - this clearly is not the case. Up until two days ago, Rajendra Pachauri was Chairman of the IPCC. He resigned on the 24th Feb and his resignation letter contained the following statement... 'For me the protection of Planet Earth, the survival of all species and sustainability of our ecosystems is more than a mission. It is my religion and my dharma.' The direction of the IPCC cannot be impartial if it has been lead by a person who was engaged in a personal crusade. It is this kind of thing that causes massive doubt amongst ordinary people. An open and questioning mind is surely a basic requirement of impartiality?. Many people come on here another time and big up Stephen hawking or Brian cox or any other number of brilliant scientific minds for their genius, but when these brilliant minds say the science is conclusive and that man made climate change is occurring.. Their now idiots with a personal crusade and no idea about science. Again thousands and thousand of peer reviewed papers proving conclusively that it's occurring. Can you find me one that shows that it isn't. Exactly what are you openly questioning. Upto now I've had random blatherings about ipcc text, fracking, 26 scientists who disagree with the wording of the document, 2 in Norwich who hid data and emails. But no science.... Refute the science, it's there, it's free to read, read it and find fault with its prognosis. Again, in order to test a theory the research and data has to be open to all to test it. This is a basic of any scientific theory. As I understand it ( unlike some, I am not privy to all the information) the research and data is withheld and/or destroyed so that it can be tested by no one apart from those on "the approved list" As I say, I may well be wrong as the info is not shared with me but I am merely going on the findings of the House of Commons report.. Which data or research would you like! . Nearly all the scientists who work on climate change print their findings in widely available scientific journals. I have most on my shelf at home, if you can't find it online let me know and I will try to pdf it for you Thanks for that. Any idea how the House of Commons report came to that conclusion since every thing is so easy to come across? Bloody useless mp's! I have just read an interesting article by Theo Vemaelen in the knowledge. I would be interested to hear your thoughts on that. " . I'm sorry I missed your post amongst the others, I'm a bit lost, do you mean the science and technology committee on the report into climategate!. They were saying something about freedom of information if I remember correctly. I honestly can tell you I subscribe to nature, science ,pnas, public library of science, journal of high energy physics and they print thousands of climate science reports, experiments and data. I've never heard of Theo vamealean, you'll have to give me a link or the jist of the story. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Although my New Learned friend has not tried to get you banned so please don't cling to that. As once again like the Green Party the facts have become misconstrued. Disappointed!! Thought I was your 'New Learned Friend' "I was referring to your good self sir | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In common with other elements of the 'progressive left',.. ...There'd wrote such a load of shite on every post,I could really have ridiculed it. zzzzz Can we move on now please". Yes let's move on to your Forbes article which you listed as fact but I've proved is actually crap drivel written by half baked idiots and paid for by big business to the tune of 28 million dollars.... What do you have to say to that...... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You see your just like all the other deniers. You talk a good talk... But come the science, you shrivel like a... "Deniers? What's the fineness of silk of silk and man made fibres go to do with it? Oh the irony. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You see your just like all the other deniers. You talk a good talk... But come the science, you shrivel like a...
Deniers? What's the fineness of silk of silk and man made fibres go to do with it?
Oh the irony. ". Climate change deniers ... Please don't prove my last post anymore than you already have! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You see your just like all the other deniers. You talk a good talk... But come the science, you shrivel like a...
Deniers? What's the fineness of silk of silk and man made fibres go to do with it?
Oh the irony. .
Climate change deniers ... Please don't prove my last post anymore than you already have!"Ha ha just messing with you at this point. I feel sure this lovely planet we call home will endure. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The green party have never hidden their left wing view, there's nothing extreme about social justice and wanting a society built for the benefit of all and not the minority. Given a choice of tory, red tory, racist, or capitulating tory lite the greens offer a real alternative to more of the same." this.....well sort of this! I agree with the sentiment if not quite the way it is put.. lol its a shame that what could have been a debate about there policies since this was tied up to their mini manifesto launch (of which they are the first of the major parties to do so) got in effect hijacked for a debate on climate change...... I am actually quite disappointed | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You see your just like all the other deniers. You talk a good talk... But come the science, you shrivel like a...
Deniers? What's the fineness of silk of silk and man made fibres go to do with it?
Oh the irony. .
Climate change deniers ... Please don't prove my last post anymore than you already have!
Ha ha just messing with you at this point.
I feel sure this lovely planet we call home will endure. ". Oh good... I've not been messed with since my operation in Stoke Mandeville .
My opening post actually said like many other misconceptions about environmentalists..... Were not trying to save the planet, the planets doing just fucking fine, it's humans who are in the shit | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The green party have never hidden their left wing view, there's nothing extreme about social justice and wanting a society built for the benefit of all and not the minority. Given a choice of tory, red tory, racist, or capitulating tory lite the greens offer a real alternative to more of the same. this.....well sort of this! I agree with the sentiment if not quite the way it is put.. lol its a shame that what could have been a debate about there policies since this was tied up to their mini manifesto launch (of which they are the first of the major parties to do so) got in effect hijacked for a debate on climate change...... I am actually quite disappointed " . You and me both! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The green party have never hidden their left wing view, there's nothing extreme about social justice and wanting a society built for the benefit of all and not the minority. Given a choice of tory, red tory, racist, or capitulating tory lite the greens offer a real alternative to more of the same. this.....well sort of this! I agree with the sentiment if not quite the way it is put.. lol its a shame that what could have been a debate about there policies since this was tied up to their mini manifesto launch (of which they are the first of the major parties to do so) got in effect hijacked for a debate on climate change...... I am actually quite disappointed " I agree. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The green party have never hidden their left wing view, there's nothing extreme about social justice and wanting a society built for the benefit of all and not the minority. Given a choice of tory, red tory, racist, or capitulating tory lite the greens offer a real alternative to more of the same. this.....well sort of this! I agree with the sentiment if not quite the way it is put.. lol its a shame that what could have been a debate about there policies since this was tied up to their mini manifesto launch (of which they are the first of the major parties to do so) got in effect hijacked for a debate on climate change...... I am actually quite disappointed " this.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Fortunately the people here are better qualified to talk about swinging than run energey policy and hopefully will stick with that. This thread has a lot of outdated criticism of the IPCC and a strange view that only greens fear for what man is doing to the environment. There's a parliamentary committee on energy and climate change. It has the work of the IPCC throughly reviewed by poeople who understand the science rather than tout about old headlines and half truths. The committee has no green members: 5 labour, 5 tory and one lib dem. This is the summary of its most recent report about the work of the IPCC "The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was set up by the United Nations in 1988 to provide assessments of the latest peer-reviewed climate science for policy-makers. The Working Group I (WGI) contribution to its Fifth Assessment Report (AR5), published last year, concluded that we can now be more confident than ever that the release of heat-trapping greenhouse gases from deforestation and the use of fossil fuels has caused much of the global warming and other changes in the climate witnessed in the latter half of the 20th Century and, if unabated, will continue to drive warming in the future. AR5 provides the best available summary of the prevailing scientific opinion on climate change currently available to policy-makers. Its conclusions have been reached with high statistical confidence by a working group made up of many of the world's leading climate scientists drawing on areas of well-understood science. The overall thrust and conclusions of the report are widely supported in the scientific community and its summaries are presented in a way that is persuasive to the lay reader. As in all areas of science that involve highly complex dynamic systems, there are uncertainties. But these uncertainties do not blur the overwhelmingly clear picture of a climate system changing as a result of human influence. The IPCC has responded extremely well to constructive criticism in the last few years and has tightened its review processes to make AR5 the most exhaustive and heavily scrutinised Assessment Report to-date. We believe that the IPCC would benefit from increasing the level of transparency by recruiting a small team of non-climate scientists to observe the review process from start to finish including during the plenary meetings to agree the Summary for Policymakers. However, the authority of the reports comes not from the process and procedure per se, but from the evidence itself: the thousands of peer-reviewed academic papers that together form a clear and unambiguous picture of a climate that is being dangerously destabilised. Of course there are those who will continue to be critical of the conclusions and the process through which the IPCC produces its Assessment Reports. But our conclusion here is clear. There is no scientific basis for downgrading the UK's ambition to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The Government and the international community must heed the IPCC's warning and work to agree a binding global deal in 2015 to limit climate change to manageable levels." Luckily they'll have far more influence over climate policy than FAB's tyre burning sub-committee " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Meanwhile .... Regular unleaded is a shade above $2 a gallon in SW Florida and so it will cost less than $30 to fill up the tank of the Charger this weekend. What with flying to Miami for the weekend and spending £20 to feed a gas guzzling super charged V8 my carbon footprint is set for an all time high over the next few days. I may even decide to leave the a/c running 24/7 just for the hell of it..... Eat my carbon Greenies "Remember to downshift if you see a Prius for maximum impact | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just for you cracken mate, here's a list of scientific bodies that hold the basic fact in agreement that, humans are affecting climate change Academia Chilena de Ciencias, Chile Academia das Ciencias de Lisboa, Portugal Academia de Ciencias de la República Dominicana Academia de Ciencias Físicas, Matemáticas y Naturales de Venezuela Academia de Ciencias Medicas, Fisicas y Naturales de Guatemala Academia Mexicana de Ciencias,Mexico Academia Nacional de Ciencias de Bolivia Academia Nacional de Ciencias del Peru Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal Académie des Sciences, France Academies of Arts, Humanities and Sciences of Canada Academy of Athens Academy of Science of Mozambique Academy of Science of South Africa Academy of Sciences for the Developing World (TWAS) Academy of Sciences Malaysia Academy of Sciences of Moldova Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic Academy of Sciences of the Islamic Republic of Iran Academy of Scientific Research and Technology, Egypt Academy of the Royal Society of New Zealand Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Italy Africa Centre for Climate and Earth Systems Science African Academy of Sciences Albanian Academy of Sciences Amazon Environmental Research Institute American Academy of Pediatrics American Anthropological Association American Association for the Advancement of Science American Association of State Climatologists (AASC) American Association of Wildlife Veterinarians American Astronomical Society American Chemical Society American College of Preventive Medicine American Fisheries Society American Geophysical Union American Institute of Biological Sciences American Institute of Physics American Meteorological Society American Physical Society American Public Health Association American Quaternary Association American Society for Microbiology American Society of Agronomy American Society of Civil Engineers American Society of Plant Biologists American Statistical Association Association of Ecosystem Research Centers Australian Academy of Science Australian Bureau of Meteorology Australian Coral Reef Society Australian Institute of Marine Science Australian Institute of Physics Australian Marine Sciences Association Australian Medical Association Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society Bangladesh Academy of Sciences Botanical Society of America Brazilian Academy of Sciences British Antarctic Survey Bulgarian Academy of Sciences California Academy of Sciences Cameroon Academy of Sciences Canadian Association of Physicists Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences Canadian Geophysical Union Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society Canadian Society of Soil Science Canadian Society of Zoologists Caribbean Academy of Sciences views Center for International Forestry Research Chinese Academy of Sciences Colombian Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) (Australia) Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research Croatian Academy of Arts and Sciences Crop Science Society of America Cuban Academy of Sciences Delegation of the Finnish Academies of Science and Letters Ecological Society of America Ecological Society of Australia Environmental Protection Agency European Academy of Sciences and Arts European Federation of Geologists European Geosciences Union European Physical Society European Science Foundation Federation of American Scientists French Academy of Sciences Geological Society of America Geological Society of Australia Geological Society of London Georgian Academy of Sciences German Academy of Natural Scientists Leopoldina Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences Indian National Science Academy Indonesian Academy of Sciences Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management Institute of Marine Engineering, Science and Technology Institute of Professional Engineers New Zealand Institution of Mechanical Engineers, UK InterAcademy Council International Alliance of Research Universities International Arctic Science Committee International Association for Great Lakes Research International Council for Science International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences International Research Institute for Climate and Society International Union for Quaternary Research International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics International Union of Pure and Applied Physics Islamic World Academy of Sciences Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities Kenya National Academy of Sciences Korean Academy of Science and Technology Kosovo Academy of Sciences and Arts l'Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal Latin American Academy of Sciences Latvian Academy of Sciences Lithuanian Academy of Sciences Madagascar National Academy of Arts, Letters, and Sciences Mauritius Academy of Science and Technology Montenegrin Academy of Sciences and Arts National Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences, Argentina National Academy of Sciences of Armenia National Academy of Sciences of the Kyrgyz Republic National Academy of Sciences, Sri Lanka National Academy of Sciences, United States of America National Aeronautics and Space Administration National Association of Geoscience Teachers National Association of State Foresters National Center for Atmospheric Research National Council of Engineers Australia National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research, New Zealand National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Research Council National Science Foundation Natural England Natural Environment Research Council, UK Natural Science Collections Alliance Network of African Science Academies New York Academy of Sciences Nicaraguan Academy of Sciences Nigerian Academy of Sciences Norwegian Academy of Sciences and Letters Oklahoma Climatological Survey Organization of Biological Field Stations Pakistan Academy of Sciences Palestine Academy for Science and Technology Pew Center on Global Climate Change Polish Academy of Sciences Romanian Academy Royal Academies for Science and the Arts of Belgium Royal Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences of Spain Royal Astronomical Society, UK Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters Royal Irish Academy Royal Meteorological Society (UK) Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research Royal Scientific Society of Jordan Royal Society of Canada Royal Society of Chemistry, UK Royal Society of the United Kingdom Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences Russian Academy of Sciences Science and Technology, Australia Science Council of Japan Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research Scientific Committee on Solar-Terrestrial Physics Scripps Institution of Oceanography Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts Slovak Academy of Sciences Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts Society for Ecological Restoration International Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics Society of American Foresters Society of Biology (UK) Society of Systematic Biologists Soil Science Society of America Sudan Academy of Sciences Sudanese National Academy of Science Tanzania Academy of Sciences The Wildlife Society (international) Turkish Academy of Sciences Uganda National Academy of Sciences Union of German Academies of Sciences and Humanities United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change University Corporation for Atmospheric Research Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution World Association of Zoos and Aquariums World Federation of Public Health Associations World Forestry Congress World Health Organization World Meteorological Organization Zambia Academy of Sciences Zimbabwe Academy of Sciences" Any proof to all the organisations you list actually providing evidence stating they believe global warming is caused by us ? anyone can make a list btw have you been to sleep yet after jotting all that down | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Meanwhile .... Regular unleaded is a shade above $2 a gallon in SW Florida and so it will cost less than $30 to fill up the tank of the Charger this weekend. What with flying to Miami for the weekend and spending £20 to feed a gas guzzling super charged V8 my carbon footprint is set for an all time high over the next few days. I may even decide to leave the a/c running 24/7 just for the hell of it..... Eat my carbon Greenies
Remember to downshift if you see a Prius for maximum impact " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
