FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Carbon footprints
Carbon footprints
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Watching QI
You can cut down on carbon emmissions by .....
Killing ya pets.
One dog is the same as a car apparantly ...and so on.
It was Quite interesting
Im just waiting for the neighbours now to rid me of the crapping cats  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ig badMan
over a year ago
Up North :-) |
"Watching QI
You can cut down on carbon emmissions by .....
Killing ya pets.
One dog is the same as a car apparantly ...and so on.
It was Quite interesting
Im just waiting for the neighbours now to rid me of the crapping cats "
So say if i kill 2 neighbours dogs i could have a gas guzzler with no remorse about the co2........Interesting  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
A horse has a much lower carbon footprint than a dog...
The dog's footprint is high because it only eats meat - and that means growing other animals to feed it, which in turn all produce CO2 - and so on....
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
we dont worry about carbon foot prints we beleive the damage is already done and we are more likely to be killed by a terrorist dirty bomb than alleged global warming thats why george drives around in a bmw m5 he says it pumps out enough co2 to kill the cows that produce the methane that poisons the planet te also says he is doing the place a favour as he pays so much tax on the fuel |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Global warming, carbon footprint, green issues... load of twaddle dreamt up by zany, horn-rimmed spectacled wearing, long haired hippy fuckers with too much time and govt grants on their hands, and then hijacked by politicians and companies to extract yet more cash from the hapless consumer who has no power to do anything at all about it.
I'll use whatever fuel I need to keep my family warm and fed, and whatever petrol I need to do my job to enable me to keep my family warm and fed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"A horse has a much lower carbon footprint than a dog...
The dog's footprint is high because it only eats meat - and that means growing other animals to feed it, which in turn all produce CO2 - and so on....
"
Never fed a dog jut meat  could nearly call her a vegi dog. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I don`t see global warming as a conspiracy...more scientific fact ...
I do what I can to not waste energy..tho I`ve I wouldn`t consider myself green ...
I see us on the path of another mass extinction event ....its the way of things ..Life will continue..
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don`t see global warming as a conspiracy...more scientific fact ...
I do what I can to not waste energy..tho I`ve I wouldn`t consider myself green ...
I see us on the path of another mass extinction event ....its the way of things ..Life will continue..
"
It is also a fact that quite a few of the scientists who were the main proponents of global warming have gone on record as syaing that they were wrong, misguided or confused as to precisely what global warming is/was.
There is a new school of thought that suggests the shifting climates around the world are shifting because the Earth itself is shifting on it's axis. It has shifted a few times in the past resulting in catastrophic climates but animal and plan life alike both learned to adapt. When the Earth shifts on it's axis, even by a couple of degrees, it means the icecaps move because the Earth's magnetic north and south poles remain constant.
I'm more inclined to believe this theory than any nutty professor who says the world is fucked because man has been poisoning the atmos for the past 70 years.
70 years?
Who they trying to fookin kid! The planet has been here for BILLIONS of years and I'm pretty sure it can survive anything we throw at it.
Yet another example of man's delusion about his own self importance. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don`t see global warming as a conspiracy...more scientific fact ...
I do what I can to not waste energy..tho I`ve I wouldn`t consider myself green ...
I see us on the path of another mass extinction event ....its the way of things ..Life will continue..
"
That's the problem. The last mass extinction wasn't caused by burning fossil fuels or chemicals.The planet is 4.5 billion years old and goes through periods of climatic change. the suggestion is that we are coming towards the very end of the last ice age and the planet is starting to warm up again. I can't see how scientists can use a couple of hundred years of recorded measurements to determine something that has been going on for 4.5b years |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don`t see global warming as a conspiracy...more scientific fact ...
I do what I can to not waste energy..tho I`ve I wouldn`t consider myself green ...
I see us on the path of another mass extinction event ....its the way of things ..Life will continue..
That's the problem. The last mass extinction wasn't caused by burning fossil fuels or chemicals.The planet is 4.5 billion years old and goes through periods of climatic change. the suggestion is that we are coming towards the very end of the last ice age and the planet is starting to warm up again. I can't see how scientists can use a couple of hundred years of recorded measurements to determine something that has been going on for 4.5b years"
The rate of change is a signpost... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The planet can't be 4.5 billion years old silly.
Baby Jesus is only 2011 years old.
And God created the heavens, earth and all living creatures.
In just under a week."
And in the year 4004 bc ...so we`re informed ....even to the day ....can`t remember it ...it begets a question  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don`t see global warming as a conspiracy...more scientific fact ...
I do what I can to not waste energy..tho I`ve I wouldn`t consider myself green ...
I see us on the path of another mass extinction event ....its the way of things ..Life will continue..
"
I think it is fair to say we have already passed the tipping point or are very close to it, so the system is in a positive feedback loop now. (Siberian perma frost melting - Methane etc).
The sad fact of the matter is we know volcanic activity affects climate and that releases around 150-300 million tonnes pa of green house gasses.
So why 27 *BILLION* tonnes pa released by human activity has no effect I have no idea.
Those numbers are not made up but known values:
(
http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/hazards/gas/index.php
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Environmentandgreenerliving/Thewiderenvironment/Climatechange/DG_072920
-You can google around you'll find the white, independent research papers and other data collecting arriving at these figures. If you still don't believe them go and measure the stuff yourself, or do a simple back of the envelope calculation, pretty easy really.)
Of course the climate has been warmer and colder in the past, but the consequence for 7 billion of us, more severe weather, arable zone will decrease as well as the habitable zones. So more people in smaller areas; and most likely a lot of attrition.
The question people seem to be arguing for some odd reason that the climate is changing (and it is) but not because of our activity.
Personally I hope to god it *IS* us causing the changing climate, otherwise there is -absolutely- -nothing- -we- -can- -do- -about- -it-.
Besides the consequence of more severe weather the arable zone will decrease as well as the habitable zones. So more people in smaller areas; and most likely a lot of attrition.
Now why people argue it's all a government conspiracy or it's the boogie monster I don't know. Especially when there is a lot of pressure on governments not to act from commercial interests. Maybe it's like been a kid when if you pretend not to see it it will go away?
In my opinion nothing is going to change in our society until it is to late, because why should I live a frugal lifestyle when my neighbours don't?
When cheap oil runs out, that is more likely to change our behaviour rather than been flooded a lot! 
Anyhow don't have nightmares now. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
theres a site called wecanknow.com which claims the start of the destruction of the planet will begin on may 11 this year and will end on oct 21.
the site claims that 'God has so graciously given in His Word showing us that these dates are 100% accurate and beyond dispute.'
sorta makes global warming a bit null & void |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"theres a site called wecanknow.com which claims the start of the destruction of the planet will begin on may 11 this year and will end on oct 21.
the site claims that 'God has so graciously given in His Word showing us that these dates are 100% accurate and beyond dispute.'
sorta makes global warming a bit null & void"
Might nip down to church & get a quick prayer in, can't do any harm. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don`t see global warming as a conspiracy...more scientific fact ...
I do what I can to not waste energy..tho I`ve I wouldn`t consider myself green ...
I see us on the path of another mass extinction event ....its the way of things ..Life will continue..
I think it is fair to say we have already passed the tipping point or are very close to it, so the system is in a positive feedback loop now. (Siberian perma frost melting - Methane etc).
The sad fact of the matter is we know volcanic activity affects climate and that releases around 150-300 million tonnes pa of green house gasses.
So why 27 *BILLION* tonnes pa released by human activity has no effect I have no idea.
Those numbers are not made up but known values:
(
http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/hazards/gas/index.php
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Environmentandgreenerliving/Thewiderenvironment/Climatechange/DG_072920
-You can google around you'll find the white, independent research papers and other data collecting arriving at these figures. If you still don't believe them go and measure the stuff yourself, or do a simple back of the envelope calculation, pretty easy really.)
Of course the climate has been warmer and colder in the past, but the consequence for 7 billion of us, more severe weather, arable zone will decrease as well as the habitable zones. So more people in smaller areas; and most likely a lot of attrition.
The question people seem to be arguing for some odd reason that the climate is changing (and it is) but not because of our activity.
Personally I hope to god it *IS* us causing the changing climate, otherwise there is -absolutely- -nothing- -we- -can- -do- -about- -it-.
Besides the consequence of more severe weather the arable zone will decrease as well as the habitable zones. So more people in smaller areas; and most likely a lot of attrition.
Now why people argue it's all a government conspiracy or it's the boogie monster I don't know. Especially when there is a lot of pressure on governments not to act from commercial interests. Maybe it's like been a kid when if you pretend not to see it it will go away?
In my opinion nothing is going to change in our society until it is to late, because why should I live a frugal lifestyle when my neighbours don't?
When cheap oil runs out, that is more likely to change our behaviour rather than been flooded a lot!
Anyhow don't have nightmares now."
Sometimes ...post are wider on the page ....words run into the margins and I can`t see the complete post ....so I couldn`t read all of your post ...but I got the sense of it ....tipping point is salient indeed ....
I don`t have nightmares ....life doesn`t revolve around us .....it shows no favouritism or an anthrophomorphic view .....small furry things again ....toss a coin .... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don`t see global warming as a conspiracy...more scientific fact ...
I do what I can to not waste energy..tho I`ve I wouldn`t consider myself green ...
I see us on the path of another mass extinction event ....its the way of things ..Life will continue..
It is also a fact that quite a few of the scientists who were the main proponents of global warming have gone on record as syaing that they were wrong, misguided or confused as to precisely what global warming is/was.
There is a new school of thought that suggests the shifting climates around the world are shifting because the Earth itself is shifting on it's axis. It has shifted a few times in the past resulting in catastrophic climates but animal and plan life alike both learned to adapt. When the Earth shifts on it's axis, even by a couple of degrees, it means the icecaps move because the Earth's magnetic north and south poles remain constant.
I'm more inclined to believe this theory than any nutty professor who says the world is fucked because man has been poisoning the atmos for the past 70 years.
70 years?
Who they trying to fookin kid! The planet has been here for BILLIONS of years and I'm pretty sure it can survive anything we throw at it.
Yet another example of man's delusion about his own self importance."
I totally agree wishy ,mans Co2 output is so miniscule compared to the planet itself ,it is arrogance to suggest we can have planetry impact on co2 levels ,the quote about polar icecaps are the best ,the artic icecap is receding ,but they dont mention the antartic ice cap is increasing.
The planet has been getting warmer for thousands of years other wise the last ice age would never of finished would it.
Also the increase Co2 levels actually make plantlife /trees etc grow quicker and scrub the atmosphere of co2 more efficiently.
The only concession i would make is stop em cutting down the trees in the amazon and congo etc ,kenya for example have barely a tree left as they cut em all down to cure the tobacco they sell.
less than 5% of plants have been tested for there medicinal properties and many are going extinct i think we need to protect these wilderness areas so we can check thre global inventory before we get rid of it forever.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
It is also a fact that quite a few of the scientists who were the main proponents of global warming have gone on record as syaing that they were wrong, misguided or confused as to precisely what global warming is/was.
There is a new school of thought that suggests the shifting climates around the world are shifting because the Earth itself is shifting on it's axis. It has shifted a few times in the past resulting in catastrophic climates but animal and plan life alike both learned to adapt. When the Earth shifts on it's axis, even by a couple of degrees, it means the icecaps move because the Earth's magnetic north and south poles remain constant.
I'm more inclined to believe this theory than any nutty professor who says the world is fucked because man has been poisoning the atmos for the past 70 years.
70 years?
Who they trying to fookin kid! The planet has been here for BILLIONS of years and I'm pretty sure it can survive anything we throw at it.
Yet another example of man's delusion about his own self importance."
A) Planet can survive - Yes
B) The Earth has an axis wobble, the Moon actually keeps us stable.
C) Few scientist come out - You mean the ones who where found out to have funding grants from big oil? 99.9% agree, you would always expect some to have the opposite view, that is science. Once you have done statistics in Maths get back to me. (hint, raining to day, so hotter weather is rubbish... not).
D) Do you realise we know more about the theory of evolution than the theory of gravity. Theory in scientific terms means something different from lay peoples terms.
E) Solar emissions are at unusual lows.
F) Explain to me quantum chromodynamics please? - In that we have a lot of people repeating none scientific hot air the read in the daily mail. Point been none of us here are real professional scientists, (white coats and all). After all why are we not questioning how planes fly but are about the climatic changes? (there are 4 mathematical theories for how planes fly btw)
Bottom line is because of climate change and what we'd need to give up in our lives is so profound we just want to make it go away. Or maybe some people are just ill informed and want to believe a certain view point on "faith" not hard data. Well fine by me, just don't expect me to fly in a plane or get into a car built and designed on faith please!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Climate_Change_Attribution.png |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Doh!!!
Why does it do that sometimes..
The end of sentences..
Run into the..
Margins..
 "
Its because of links to wikipedia or whatever do not have spaces in so will not wrap.
The site admins need to change the css style to word-wrap:break-word
which would fix it in most browsers. Or use firefox? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
C) Few scientist come out - You mean the ones who where found out to have funding grants from big oil? 99.9% agree, you would always expect some to have the opposite view, that is science. "
On a serious note, and as someone who is agnostic on climate change, one of the biggest problems in trying to get a sensible debate is the way the research is both funded and reported.
Climate change is big business in the science world, where money can be difficult to come by for 'unsexy' research.
Hence loads of scientists do loads of research into climate change because it pays the mortgage.
I have nothing but respect for the scientific community and think on the whole they do an excellent job.
The way the media interpret and report the scientists findings however, is a different story and leads to a considerable clouding of the issue.
In our dumbed down society people expect simple answers to complex questions and the media is only to happy to give them 'black & white' scenarios which then become the 'truth as we know it' in popular opinion, despite it never being as simple as that.
It's a bit like people believing that organic food is 'better' for you when in fact it has been scientifically proven not to be.
But that wouldnt make good TV for all the zeitgeisty chefs... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
I totally agree wishy ,mans Co2 output is so miniscule compared to the planet itself ,it is arrogance to suggest we can have planetry impact on co2 levels ,the quote about polar icecaps are the best ,the artic icecap is receding ,but they dont mention the antartic ice cap is increasing.
The planet has been getting warmer for thousands of years other wise the last ice age would never of finished would it.
Also the increase Co2 levels actually make plantlife /trees etc grow quicker and scrub the atmosphere of co2 more efficiently.
The only concession i would make is stop em cutting down the trees in the amazon and congo etc ,kenya for example have barely a tree left as they cut em all down to cure the tobacco they sell.
less than 5% of plants have been tested for there medicinal properties and many are going extinct i think we need to protect these wilderness areas so we can check thre global inventory before we get rid of it forever.
"
GOOD GOD PEOPLE, please do a bit of research first!
Volcanic activity: 150-300 Million tonnes pa.
Rain Forest (Amazon), usually absorbs a 1500 million tonnes, but has emitted 5000 million tonnes due to climatic issues last year:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12356835
Human activity emits: 27000 million tonnes pa.
if your car emits 150 grams of CO2 per km, means for 100km you emit 15Kg. Now think about house heating, growing your food, food been transported, electricity so on and so on.
Go and calculate how much you make here:
http://www.carbonfootprint.com/energyconsumption.html
Now imagine a few tonnes of anything been dumped in every garden in the land... no impact, perfectly fine...
arm chair scientist, if you are going to debate something (which is good and admirable) do not just pull numbers out of thin air or what you'd like them to be please. phff. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
C) Few scientist come out - You mean the ones who where found out to have funding grants from big oil? 99.9% agree, you would always expect some to have the opposite view, that is science.
On a serious note, and as someone who is agnostic on climate change, one of the biggest problems in trying to get a sensible debate is the way the research is both funded and reported.
Climate change is big business in the science world, where money can be difficult to come by for 'unsexy' research.
Hence loads of scientists do loads of research into climate change because it pays the mortgage.
I have nothing but respect for the scientific community and think on the whole they do an excellent job.
The way the media interpret and report the scientists findings however, is a different story and leads to a considerable clouding of the issue.
In our dumbed down society people expect simple answers to complex questions and the media is only to happy to give them 'black & white' scenarios which then become the 'truth as we know it' in popular opinion, despite it never being as simple as that.
It's a bit like people believing that organic food is 'better' for you when in fact it has been scientifically proven not to be.
But that wouldnt make good TV for all the zeitgeisty chefs..."
Excellent... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Doh!!!
Why does it do that sometimes..
The end of sentences..
Run into the..
Margins..
Its because of links to wikipedia or whatever do not have spaces in so will not wrap.
The site admins need to change the css style to word-wrap:break-word
which would fix it in most browsers. Or use firefox? "
Thanks for explaining it ....but can you hear *tumble*.....but again thanks |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
I totally agree wishy ,mans Co2 output is so miniscule compared to the planet itself ,it is arrogance to suggest we can have planetry impact on co2 levels ,the quote about polar icecaps are the best ,the artic icecap is receding ,but they dont mention the antartic ice cap is increasing.
The planet has been getting warmer for thousands of years other wise the last ice age would never of finished would it.
Also the increase Co2 levels actually make plantlife /trees etc grow quicker and scrub the atmosphere of co2 more efficiently.
The only concession i would make is stop em cutting down the trees in the amazon and congo etc ,kenya for example have barely a tree left as they cut em all down to cure the tobacco they sell.
less than 5% of plants have been tested for there medicinal properties and many are going extinct i think we need to protect these wilderness areas so we can check thre global inventory before we get rid of it forever.
GOOD GOD PEOPLE, please do a bit of research first!
Volcanic activity: 150-300 Million tonnes pa.
Rain Forest (Amazon), usually absorbs a 1500 million tonnes, but has emitted 5000 million tonnes due to climatic issues last year:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12356835
Human activity emits: 27000 million tonnes pa.
if your car emits 150 grams of CO2 per km, means for 100km you emit 15Kg. Now think about house heating, growing your food, food been transported, electricity so on and so on.
Go and calculate how much you make here:
http://www.carbonfootprint.com/energyconsumption.html
Now imagine a few tonnes of anything been dumped in every garden in the land... no impact, perfectly fine...
arm chair scientist, if you are going to debate something (which is good and admirable) do not just pull numbers out of thin air or what you'd like them to be please. phff. "
Indeed ...the drought in the Amazon has turned it into an exporter of carbon ....thats science |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
I totally agree wishy ,mans Co2 output is so miniscule compared to the planet itself ,it is arrogance to suggest we can have planetry impact on co2 levels ,the quote about polar icecaps are the best ,the artic icecap is receding ,but they dont mention the antartic ice cap is increasing.
The planet has been getting warmer for thousands of years other wise the last ice age would never of finished would it.
Also the increase Co2 levels actually make plantlife /trees etc grow quicker and scrub the atmosphere of co2 more efficiently.
The only concession i would make is stop em cutting down the trees in the amazon and congo etc ,kenya for example have barely a tree left as they cut em all down to cure the tobacco they sell.
less than 5% of plants have been tested for there medicinal properties and many are going extinct i think we need to protect these wilderness areas so we can check thre global inventory before we get rid of it forever.
GOOD GOD PEOPLE, please do a bit of research first!
Volcanic activity: 150-300 Million tonnes pa.
Rain Forest (Amazon), usually absorbs a 1500 million tonnes, but has emitted 5000 million tonnes due to climatic issues last year:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12356835
Human activity emits: 27000 million tonnes pa.
if your car emits 150 grams of CO2 per km, means for 100km you emit 15Kg. Now think about house heating, growing your food, food been transported, electricity so on and so on.
Go and calculate how much you make here:
http://www.carbonfootprint.com/energyconsumption.html
Now imagine a few tonnes of anything been dumped in every garden in the land... no impact, perfectly fine...
arm chair scientist, if you are going to debate something (which is good and admirable) do not just pull numbers out of thin air or what you'd like them to be please. phff. "
lol is that a hissy fit lol ..listen if you want to truly go and quote statistics at me, please use published reports and not random websites who are often incorrectly quoting oher people who are following the scientific gravey train .
As wishy said most of these figures have now been debunked by independant think tanks ,your over reliance on math signifies you refuse to accept that some people have a vested interest in quoting them. How can the scientist possible tell us what is happening with global weather patterns,when the most powerful Krays in the world can only do guestimations with wide variations of accuracy.
The fact is the math is not there we are only able to go back 300000 years via the ice samples taken and it too showed massive swings in atmospheric carbon content ,this is nothing new !
Until the math behind Fluid dynamics (being worked on at the moment at Aston Uni) and a more accurate weather prediction model is devised (at least 20 years away) The "evidence" you quote is merely bad hypothesis. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Actually, QI was talking a load of bollocks. Dogs aren't obligate carnivores, as they said, cats are. Dogs mainly eat cereal these days as that's the biggest component of bought dog food. So- a load of nonsense |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Actually, QI was talking a load of bollocks. Dogs aren't obligate carnivores, as they said, cats are. Dogs mainly eat cereal these days as that's the biggest component of bought dog food. So- a load of nonsense "
Yeah i think your right ,its become the norm now for programmes or news channels(on slow news days),to trot out the global climate change "hysteria" as it makes good tele to panic the masses,its interesting that the hundreds of counter evidence never makes it out .The Email's from scientists trying to suppress contrary evidence is a sure fire indicator that some hefty research grants are at stake,its become known as envirospin.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Catatrophism has always played a part of this planets history ....the delusion comes when peeps think, we as humans will be immune from the consequences somehow .....thats silly ... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I know I'm right . Surprised you didn't hear me shouting at the telly lol. Tbh the very, very few questions on that programme that I actually know anything about, have been wrong, too! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Catatrophism has always played a part of this planets history ....the delusion comes when peeps think, we as humans will be immune from the consequences somehow .....thats silly ..."
i totally agree if you come from the fact that planet earth is basically fucked as its slowly being dragged into a black hole in the middle of the milky way,or that one day the sun will go super nova and burn it like an iron filing tossed into a fire ,it may be possible to talk about how we cope as a species with another ice age or global temperature swing and globally we can have a logical plan developed ,but with envirospin ,basically its like watching corporal jones off dads army shouting "dont panic ,dont panic ,we are ruining the planet ..dont panic" |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Catatrophism has always played a part of this planets history ....the delusion comes when peeps think, we as humans will be immune from the consequences somehow .....thats silly ...
i totally agree if you come from the fact that planet earth is basically fucked as its slowly being dragged into a black hole in the middle of the milky way,or that one day the sun will go super nova and burn it like an iron filing tossed into a fire ,it may be possible to talk about how we cope as a species with another ice age or global temperature swing and globally we can have a logical plan developed ,but with envirospin ,basically its like watching corporal jones off dads army shouting "dont panic ,dont panic ,we are ruining the planet ..dont panic""
Doesn`t bother me if we are the cause of global warming or not ...
Whats apparent to me is its happening ....thats all ....
Would you say burgeoning world population is an example of catastrophism... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Catatrophism has always played a part of this planets history ....the delusion comes when peeps think, we as humans will be immune from the consequences somehow .....thats silly ...
i totally agree if you come from the fact that planet earth is basically fucked as its slowly being dragged into a black hole in the middle of the milky way,or that one day the sun will go super nova and burn it like an iron filing tossed into a fire ,it may be possible to talk about how we cope as a species with another ice age or global temperature swing and globally we can have a logical plan developed ,but with envirospin ,basically its like watching corporal jones off dads army shouting "dont panic ,dont panic ,we are ruining the planet ..dont panic"
Doesn`t bother me if we are the cause of global warming or not ...
Whats apparent to me is its happening ....thats all ....
Would you say burgeoning world population is an example of catastrophism..."
yes definately with 10.5 billion of us predicted by 2050 all giving out co2 as well ,i suppose loss of life from natural disasters and starvation are inevitable really . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Would you say burgeoning world population is an example of catastrophism...
yes definately with 10.5 billion of us predicted by 2050 all giving out co2 as well ,i suppose loss of life from natural disasters and starvation are inevitable really . "
A few fewer people (OK, quite a LOT fewer people) on the planet wouldn't be such a bad thing.
The earth has people we can't feed, water, nurse or employ, yet they're still breeding like wildfire out there.
It has to stop. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Watching QI
You can cut down on carbon emmissions by .....
Killing ya pets.
One dog is the same as a car apparantly ...and so on.
It was Quite interesting
Im just waiting for the neighbours now to rid me of the crapping cats "
Even if the proposition were true I wouldn't go as far as killing dogs.
I'd happily insist they were sterilised (apart from neccessary working dogs) and other breeds allowed to die out.
Cats, on the other hand, make great target practise. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Catatrophism has always played a part of this planets history ....the delusion comes when peeps think, we as humans will be immune from the consequences somehow .....thats silly ...
i totally agree if you come from the fact that planet earth is basically fucked as its slowly being dragged into a black hole in the middle of the milky way,or that one day the sun will go super nova and burn it like an iron filing tossed into a fire ,it may be possible to talk about how we cope as a species with another ice age or global temperature swing and globally we can have a logical plan developed ,but with envirospin ,basically its like watching corporal jones off dads army shouting "dont panic ,dont panic ,we are ruining the planet ..dont panic"
Doesn`t bother me if we are the cause of global warming or not ...
Whats apparent to me is its happening ....thats all ....
Would you say burgeoning world population is an example of catastrophism...
yes definately with 10.5 billion of us predicted by 2050 all giving out co2 as well ,i suppose loss of life from natural disasters and starvation are inevitable really . "
Catastrophes differ from disasters ...least in the way I understand them ...I s`pose its a question of scale ....
Lovelocks Gaia theory is an example of catastrophism I guess ....
So do you foresee fer some kind of world governance then to tackle the population explosion ...whens the tipping point that turns heads in that direction .... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Watching QI
You can cut down on carbon emmissions by .....
Killing ya pets.
One dog is the same as a car apparantly ...and so on.
It was Quite interesting
Im just waiting for the neighbours now to rid me of the crapping cats
Even if the proposition were true I wouldn't go as far as killing dogs.
I'd happily insist they were sterilised (apart from neccessary working dogs) and other breeds allowed to die out.
Cats, on the other hand, make great target practise."
lol your on your own with that one mate ....expect a cat lobby backlash |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
".............
So do you foresee fer some kind of world governance then to tackle the population explosion ...whens the tipping point that turns heads in that direction ...."
There's comment on Fab and elsewhere about how and where the DfID budget is spent.
Perhaps it might be linked to the recipient nation's ability to reduce its population. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Catatrophism has always played a part of this planets history ....the delusion comes when peeps think, we as humans will be immune from the consequences somehow .....thats silly ...
i totally agree if you come from the fact that planet earth is basically fucked as its slowly being dragged into a black hole in the middle of the milky way,or that one day the sun will go super nova and burn it like an iron filing tossed into a fire ,it may be possible to talk about how we cope as a species with another ice age or global temperature swing and globally we can have a logical plan developed ,but with envirospin ,basically its like watching corporal jones off dads army shouting "dont panic ,dont panic ,we are ruining the planet ..dont panic"
Doesn`t bother me if we are the cause of global warming or not ...
Whats apparent to me is its happening ....thats all ....
Would you say burgeoning world population is an example of catastrophism...
yes definately with 10.5 billion of us predicted by 2050 all giving out co2 as well ,i suppose loss of life from natural disasters and starvation are inevitable really .
Catastrophes differ from disasters ...least in the way I understand them ...I s`pose its a question of scale ....
Lovelocks Gaia theory is an example of catastrophism I guess ....
So do you foresee fer some kind of world governance then to tackle the population explosion ...whens the tipping point that turns heads in that direction ...."
i dont know ,tbh i doubt it, as we only seem to form serious action based coallisions when it comes to war.The rest of the time we seem to be too busy naturally protecting our own national interests. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
".........
Cats, on the other hand, make great target practise.
lol your on your own with that one mate ....expect a cat lobby backlash "
I don't doubt it. It won't alter the facts. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Catatrophism has always played a part of this planets history ....the delusion comes when peeps think, we as humans will be immune from the consequences somehow .....thats silly ...
i totally agree if you come from the fact that planet earth is basically fucked as its slowly being dragged into a black hole in the middle of the milky way,or that one day the sun will go super nova and burn it like an iron filing tossed into a fire ,it may be possible to talk about how we cope as a species with another ice age or global temperature swing and globally we can have a logical plan developed ,but with envirospin ,basically its like watching corporal jones off dads army shouting "dont panic ,dont panic ,we are ruining the planet ..dont panic"
Doesn`t bother me if we are the cause of global warming or not ...
Whats apparent to me is its happening ....thats all ....
Would you say burgeoning world population is an example of catastrophism...
yes definately with 10.5 billion of us predicted by 2050 all giving out co2 as well ,i suppose loss of life from natural disasters and starvation are inevitable really .
Catastrophes differ from disasters ...least in the way I understand them ...I s`pose its a question of scale ....
Lovelocks Gaia theory is an example of catastrophism I guess ....
So do you foresee fer some kind of world governance then to tackle the population explosion ...whens the tipping point that turns heads in that direction ....
i dont know ,tbh i doubt it, as we only seem to form serious action based coallisions when it comes to war.The rest of the time we seem to be too busy naturally protecting our own national interests. "
Heads in the sand isn`t it ....
I`ve an interest in palaeontology...Goulds ...Its a Wonderful Life is fascinating ...kinds informs my indifference I guess ...not just that ...others as well ...
As an aside ..NASA is keeping a close eye on Apophis..a 250m asteroid ....heading our way ....1 in 45,000 estimated chance of hitting us in 2036.....they`ll reestimate the odds in a couple of years .....just summat I came across ....its had profound effects in the past so kinda gets mentioned alot ...Alverez et al ...
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"....cut...So do you foresee fer some kind of world governance then to tackle the population explosion ...whens the tipping point that turns heads in that direction ...."
further to this, i am not sure i trust world governance,In a 1996 report by the UN on global warming, two statements were deleted from the final draft. Here they are:
1) “None of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed climate changes to increases in greenhouse gases.”
2) “No study to date has positively attributed all or part of the climate change to man–made causes”
To the present day there is still no scientific proof that man-made CO2 causes significant global warming.
I can only hypothesise that the global warming arguament is really just a vehicle for covering up the fact that fossil fuels are running out and its a method of conserving stocks until new energy sources are developed.
Either way i definately dont trust the UN to give us the whole story on anything tbh ,so if world organisation were formed it would have to be based on honesty. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Can we start with 4x4 drivers who never leave the Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea and do a 300 yard school run with Tarquin & Hermione."
No, because they arent the problem - but they get the stick in the media because 'chelsea tractor' is a trick meeja phrase which sticks in Joe Publics addled mind.
And it means Joe Public can go about his business happy in the knowledge that some rich wanker is the problem, not him.
Whereas in fact the average Range-Rover emits much less pollution than a Ford Cortina from the early 80's.
Thus showing that industry and science will collude and find solutions when there is a financial incentive.
In the next decade around a billion people or so are going to be hooked up to electricity for the 1st time in countries like India, Pakistan and China.
Banning 4X4's from Chelsea aint the solution, just a neat way or pointing the finger at someone else. It's as spurious an argument as 'tax the rich' - an easy and cheap socio/policital jibe which is thrown about with abandon because it won't be 'you' who is affected.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
My son had an oil hungry old boiler (not Roman Abramovich) and I said he needed to replace it to cut down on costs and his carbon footprint.
He came over today and said his bills were tons lower lately and he hadn't been using as oil much since he replaced his system. "Well done", I said "You're saving the planet too!" I sat thinking for a minute and realised he had called into my house after work for a shower and dinner almost every night since the new year....... what an excellent way for him to save his own pocket.... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Either way i definately dont trust the UN to give us the whole story on anything tbh ,so if world organisation were formed it would have to be based on honesty."
Who's honesty?
Yours?
Theirs?
Mine?
Honesty as defined by the 'World forum on Honesty?
Who'd be on that then?
Honestly? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ig badMan
over a year ago
Up North :-) |
"Can we start with 4x4 drivers who never leave the Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea and do a 300 yard school run with Tarquin & Hermione.
No, because they arent the problem - but they get the stick in the media because 'chelsea tractor' is a trick meeja phrase which sticks in Joe Publics addled mind.
And it means Joe Public can go about his business happy in the knowledge that some rich wanker is the problem, not him.
Whereas in fact the average Range-Rover emits much less pollution than a Ford Cortina from the early 80's.
Thus showing that industry and science will collude and find solutions when there is a financial incentive.
In the next decade around a billion people or so are going to be hooked up to electricity for the 1st time in countries like India, Pakistan and China.
Banning 4X4's from Chelsea aint the solution, just a neat way or pointing the finger at someone else. It's as spurious an argument as 'tax the rich' - an easy and cheap socio/policital jibe which is thrown about with abandon because it won't be 'you' who is affected.
"
Actually a valid point as new cars produce less co2. What you do need to add though is how much co2 has been used to make them in the first place. Its the same with all these electric cars. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"....cut...So do you foresee fer some kind of world governance then to tackle the population explosion ...whens the tipping point that turns heads in that direction ....
further to this, i am not sure i trust world governance,In a 1996 report by the UN on global warming, two statements were deleted from the final draft. Here they are:
1) “None of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed climate changes to increases in greenhouse gases.”
2) “No study to date has positively attributed all or part of the climate change to man–made causes”
To the present day there is still no scientific proof that man-made CO2 causes significant global warming.
I can only hypothesise that the global warming arguament is really just a vehicle for covering up the fact that fossil fuels are running out and its a method of conserving stocks until new energy sources are developed.
Either way i definately dont trust the UN to give us the whole story on anything tbh ,so if world organisation were formed it would have to be based on honesty."
I`d agree theres little merit in alot of the pronouncements given by such and such ...as you say, theres vested interests on either side ....
Debating causes ain`t the issue fer me ....clear evidence substaniates that major climate change is on our doorstep ....it kinda gets muddied and entangled if we start chucking statistics and citations around ....
Its a balance of things thats swayed my mind ....tho its tempting to cite nobel prize winners, peer reviewed analysis and credible scientists .....Sensualfire posted an excellent take on this situation ... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Can we start with 4x4 drivers who never leave the Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea and do a 300 yard school run with Tarquin & Hermione.
No, because they arent the problem - but they get the stick in the media because 'chelsea tractor' is a trick meeja phrase which sticks in Joe Publics addled mind.
And it means Joe Public can go about his business happy in the knowledge that some rich wanker is the problem, not him.
Whereas in fact the average Range-Rover emits much less pollution than a Ford Cortina from the early 80's.
Thus showing that industry and science will collude and find solutions when there is a financial incentive.
In the next decade around a billion people or so are going to be hooked up to electricity for the 1st time in countries like India, Pakistan and China.
Banning 4X4's from Chelsea aint the solution, just a neat way or pointing the finger at someone else. It's as spurious an argument as 'tax the rich' - an easy and cheap socio/policital jibe which is thrown about with abandon because it won't be 'you' who is affected.
"
My post was in response to 'target practise' rather than saving the planet
I just don't like em |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Catatrophism has always played a part of this planets history ....the delusion comes when peeps think, we as humans will be immune from the consequences somehow .....thats silly ...
i totally agree if you come from the fact that planet earth is basically fucked as its slowly being dragged into a black hole in the middle of the milky way,or that one day the sun will go super nova and burn it like an iron filing tossed into a fire ,it may be possible to talk about how we cope as a species with another ice age or global temperature swing and globally we can have a logical plan developed ,but with envirospin ,basically its like watching corporal jones off dads army shouting "dont panic ,dont panic ,we are ruining the planet ..dont panic"
Doesn`t bother me if we are the cause of global warming or not ...
Whats apparent to me is its happening ....thats all ....
Would you say burgeoning world population is an example of catastrophism...
yes definately with 10.5 billion of us predicted by 2050 all giving out co2 as well ,i suppose loss of life from natural disasters and starvation are inevitable really .
Catastrophes differ from disasters ...least in the way I understand them ...I s`pose its a question of scale ....
Lovelocks Gaia theory is an example of catastrophism I guess ....
So do you foresee fer some kind of world governance then to tackle the population explosion ...whens the tipping point that turns heads in that direction ....
i dont know ,tbh i doubt it, as we only seem to form serious action based coallisions when it comes to war.The rest of the time we seem to be too busy naturally protecting our own national interests.
Heads in the sand isn`t it ....
I`ve an interest in palaeontology...Goulds ...Its a Wonderful Life is fascinating ...kinds informs my indifference I guess ...not just that ...others as well ...
As an aside ..NASA is keeping a close eye on Apophis..a 250m asteroid ....heading our way ....1 in 45,000 estimated chance of hitting us in 2036.....they`ll reestimate the odds in a couple of years .....just summat I came across ....its had profound effects in the past so kinda gets mentioned alot ...Alverez et al ...
"
heads in the sand and an arrogance that we are in some way more important than any other species, because a twist of fate made is top of the food chain.I just think its time as a species we grew up and realised how unimportant we actually are at this point in our development.The global hypocrasy makes me laugh when we talk about the sanctity of life within our law,then when its expediant in some national or international spat to wipe out millions
I just think (and i may be wrong ,maybe war is natural) till we stop fighting each other and globally work together ,we are all at risk and nothing we can do or say will stop that. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Correct - total energy cost for something like a Toyota Prius is horrendous.
And the Govt scrappage scheme has meant than hundreds of thousands of perfectly serviceable cars with years of life left in them have been replaced by new cars - which used up a shitload of natural resources to make.
So whilst modern cars are much more efficient than older ones, we've already used the raw materials to build the older ones so we should be using them for as long as poss before we dig up more iron ore etc etc.
A bit of joined up thinking wouldnt go amiss.
But it's the human race, so that aint gonna happen. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Catatrophism has always played a part of this planets history ....the delusion comes when peeps think, we as humans will be immune from the consequences somehow .....thats silly ...
i totally agree if you come from the fact that planet earth is basically fucked as its slowly being dragged into a black hole in the middle of the milky way,or that one day the sun will go super nova and burn it like an iron filing tossed into a fire ,it may be possible to talk about how we cope as a species with another ice age or global temperature swing and globally we can have a logical plan developed ,but with envirospin ,basically its like watching corporal jones off dads army shouting "dont panic ,dont panic ,we are ruining the planet ..dont panic"
Doesn`t bother me if we are the cause of global warming or not ...
Whats apparent to me is its happening ....thats all ....
Would you say burgeoning world population is an example of catastrophism...
yes definately with 10.5 billion of us predicted by 2050 all giving out co2 as well ,i suppose loss of life from natural disasters and starvation are inevitable really .
Catastrophes differ from disasters ...least in the way I understand them ...I s`pose its a question of scale ....
Lovelocks Gaia theory is an example of catastrophism I guess ....
So do you foresee fer some kind of world governance then to tackle the population explosion ...whens the tipping point that turns heads in that direction ....
i dont know ,tbh i doubt it, as we only seem to form serious action based coallisions when it comes to war.The rest of the time we seem to be too busy naturally protecting our own national interests.
Heads in the sand isn`t it ....
I`ve an interest in palaeontology...Goulds ...Its a Wonderful Life is fascinating ...kinds informs my indifference I guess ...not just that ...others as well ...
As an aside ..NASA is keeping a close eye on Apophis..a 250m asteroid ....heading our way ....1 in 45,000 estimated chance of hitting us in 2036.....they`ll reestimate the odds in a couple of years .....just summat I came across ....its had profound effects in the past so kinda gets mentioned alot ...Alverez et al ...
heads in the sand and an arrogance that we are in some way more important than any other species, because a twist of fate made is top of the food chain.I just think its time as a species we grew up and realised how unimportant we actually are at this point in our development.The global hypocrasy makes me laugh when we talk about the sanctity of life within our law,then when its expediant in some national or international spat to wipe out millions
I just think (and i may be wrong ,maybe war is natural) till we stop fighting each other and globally work together ,we are all at risk and nothing we can do or say will stop that. "
I think we`re on the same hymn sheet...I agree completely .. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ig badMan
over a year ago
Up North :-) |
"Correct - total energy cost for something like a Toyota Prius is horrendous.
And the Govt scrappage scheme has meant than hundreds of thousands of perfectly serviceable cars with years of life left in them have been replaced by new cars - which used up a shitload of natural resources to make.
So whilst modern cars are much more efficient than older ones, we've already used the raw materials to build the older ones so we should be using them for as long as poss before we dig up more iron ore etc etc.
A bit of joined up thinking wouldnt go amiss.
But it's the human race, so that aint gonna happen."
Just seen some comment on another site that you have to do over 100,000 miles before you break even on co2 with a new car. It makes you think a bit looking at it that way  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
My post was in response to 'target practise' rather than saving the planet
I just don't like em "
Ah, you're looking for a different thread, try searching for 'cunts who are cunts because I think they are cunts'
(I'll probably have significant posts on it...) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The world's about to be destroyed
There's no point getting all annoyed
Lie back and let the planet dissolve around you
So long, and thanks for all the fish
So sad that it should come to this
We tried to warn you all, but, oh, dear
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Either way i definately dont trust the UN to give us the whole story on anything tbh ,so if world organisation were formed it would have to be based on honesty.
Who's honesty?
Yours?
Theirs?
Mine?
Honesty as defined by the 'World forum on Honesty?
Who'd be on that then?
Honestly?"
no i agree there are many perceptions of truth ,but if we are dealing in science the findings should speak for themselves after review and be presented as found .I get the impression that if its not presented exactly as found that it loses its credibility. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Correct - total energy cost for something like a Toyota Prius is horrendous.
And the Govt scrappage scheme has meant than hundreds of thousands of perfectly serviceable cars with years of life left in them have been replaced by new cars - which used up a shitload of natural resources to make.
So whilst modern cars are much more efficient than older ones, we've already used the raw materials to build the older ones so we should be using them for as long as poss before we dig up more iron ore etc etc.
A bit of joined up thinking wouldnt go amiss.
But it's the human race, so that aint gonna happen.
Just seen some comment on another site that you have to do over 100,000 miles before you break even on co2 with a new car. It makes you think a bit looking at it that way "
Saw a peach a couple of weeks ago - motoring journalist was offered a new Discovery against his old one, new one had marginally better economy/co2 stats etc.
By taking into account just the cost to change, not the overall cost of the car, he was going to have to run the car for 140 years to get his money back on the deal... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
There was that spat on a UN climate change report ...there was some inaccuracies within it ....instantly grabbed upon by the climate sceptics ....
I actually thought it was good science ...peer reviewed...challenged and clarified ... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Either way i definately dont trust the UN to give us the whole story on anything tbh ,so if world organisation were formed it would have to be based on honesty.
Who's honesty?
Yours?
Theirs?
Mine?
Honesty as defined by the 'World forum on Honesty?
Who'd be on that then?
Honestly?
no i agree there are many perceptions of truth ,but if we are dealing in science the findings should speak for themselves after review and be presented as found .I get the impression that if its not presented exactly as found that it loses its credibility."
Agree.
And therein lies the problem - do we listen to the 'big oil' scientist, or the 'greener than your grass' scientist or the 'listen guys, this is the real truth' outsider scientist?
To be honest, I gave up on the human race a while back.
I now spend most of my time seeking meaningless casual sexual encounters with people I source on the internet.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Either way i definately dont trust the UN to give us the whole story on anything tbh ,so if world organisation were formed it would have to be based on honesty.
Who's honesty?
Yours?
Theirs?
Mine?
Honesty as defined by the 'World forum on Honesty?
Who'd be on that then?
Honestly?
no i agree there are many perceptions of truth ,but if we are dealing in science the findings should speak for themselves after review and be presented as found .I get the impression that if its not presented exactly as found that it loses its credibility.
Agree.
And therein lies the problem - do we listen to the 'big oil' scientist, or the 'greener than your grass' scientist or the 'listen guys, this is the real truth' outsider scientist?
To be honest, I gave up on the human race a while back.
I now spend most of my time seeking meaningless casual sexual encounters with people I source on the internet.
"
Lol...I`ve some sympathy for you ....however there are scientists about who do tke their profession seriously....a detached evidence based approach ...who`s personalities are such that they insist on independent citical analysis ...they do exist ...its wether they are heard or not .... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Either way i definately dont trust the UN to give us the whole story on anything tbh ,so if world organisation were formed it would have to be based on honesty.
Who's honesty?
Yours?
Theirs?
Mine?
Honesty as defined by the 'World forum on Honesty?
Who'd be on that then?
Honestly?
no i agree there are many perceptions of truth ,but if we are dealing in science the findings should speak for themselves after review and be presented as found .I get the impression that if its not presented exactly as found that it loses its credibility.
Agree.
And therein lies the problem - do we listen to the 'big oil' scientist, or the 'greener than your grass' scientist or the 'listen guys, this is the real truth' outsider scientist?
To be honest, I gave up on the human race a while back.
I now spend most of my time seeking meaningless casual sexual encounters with people I source on the internet.
"
lmfao |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There was that spat on a UN climate change report ...there was some inaccuracies within it ....instantly grabbed upon by the climate sceptics ....
I actually thought it was good science ...peer reviewed...challenged and clarified ..."
Yeah there was that issue about the data from the University of East Anglia (a world renowned centre for climate change research).
There was an email between the scientists about a "fix" for the data and so the press/world jumped on it etc etc.
Turns out that the issue is to do with tree rings. They grow at different rates based on temperature and are very accurate record of historical temperatures (verified against ice cores etc), but only up to the 1960s where afterwards they under report the temperature for reasons not yet understood.
So the fix was to switch to actual instrument data to deal with this divergence.
Which is the problem really, trying to generate a single graph for a complex problem is always going to be fraught with problems and scientists don't help by on the main been inept at communicating with the masses in laymen's terms.
Actually there was a good Horizon program about this a few weeks ago about scientists been their own worst enemy. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There was that spat on a UN climate change report ...there was some inaccuracies within it ....instantly grabbed upon by the climate sceptics ....
I actually thought it was good science ...peer reviewed...challenged and clarified ...
Yeah there was that issue about the data from the University of East Anglia (a world renowned centre for climate change research).
There was an email between the scientists about a "fix" for the data and so the press/world jumped on it etc etc.
Turns out that the issue is to do with tree rings. They grow at different rates based on temperature and are very accurate record of historical temperatures (verified against ice cores etc), but only up to the 1960s where afterwards they under report the temperature for reasons not yet understood.
So the fix was to switch to actual instrument data to deal with this divergence.
Which is the problem really, trying to generate a single graph for a complex problem is always going to be fraught with problems and scientists don't help by on the main been inept at communicating with the masses in laymen's terms.
Actually there was a good Horizon program about this a few weeks ago about scientists been their own worst enemy."
A great summary ....yeah scintists find it hard to communicate ....tho I remember Heinz Wolf ....great fella haha ...
Oh!! I missed that programme .....
A wonderful read also along the same lines about science and its sociology is The Trouble With Physics by Lee Smolin.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
" .
Yeah there was that issue about the data from the University of East Anglia (a world renowned centre for climate change research).
."
that's cos they were counting on their fingers |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *umourCouple
over a year ago
Rushden |
I really have no idea about all this science! To me, you can make anything look like you want it to look and that is WITH peer reviews!
Discovery Channel
Program on Climate Change said that this is man made and in the 20th century the average temperatures had gone up by some percentage. Bleating on about how it must be Industry and our love of fossil fuels, there came a grave warning to stop now or we will be bringing great troubles to our future selves.
Discovery Channel
Program about Krakatoa and the massive explosion that had an effect all over the globe! One of the scientists quoted an accepted paper on these effects and actually said that the effect of the explosion of Krakatoa and the decrease of temperatures world wide brought on by the ash and gasses thrown into the atmosphere, were felt well into the 20th century.
So, who is to say that this is uncontrollable Climate Change and not just the “Normalisation” of global temperatures?
I kinda side with the poster who said this may be a front for preserving fossil fuels until they get new fuels developed! I also liked Sensuals comment about the Pirus having a very high carbon footprint. I have been aware and even posting about that for the last three years! Buying one is like women wearing Uggs. One celeb does it so people follow like sheep!
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Cats, on the other hand, make great target practise.
If only - most of those houses around here have one or more cats - and they all seem to crap in my garden - grrrrr!! Stinky nasty stuff  "
So long as you don't 'disappear' too many of them at the same time and dispose of the evidence well away from home you'll get away with it for ages.
All it takes is two or three to vanish and the others begin to get kept indoors. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
