Meet Swingers

Entertainment

Latest Members

Fun and Games

Information

Shopping

Site Stats

Members:
1,355,959
Online Now:
3,392
Msgs Sent:
154,951,983
Photo Ads:
723,983
User Pics:
562,922
Video Chat:
797
Search
Next »
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9
< >

 

1st Sep 2010 - 5:39pm
kentswingers777's Avatarkentswingers777Godlike
Joined:
14 Dec 2005
Posts:
8462
Location:
-
ProfilePM
flower411 wrote:

kentswingers777 wrote:

I would like the climate change brigade to explain this....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1307782/Hot--farewell-coldest-August-17-years.html



We are all being taken for fools..........


It`s been explained to you so many times, your failure to understand gives the reason for your final statement.



Been explained to me? What from EXPERTS on here? icon_lol.gif icon_lol.gif icon_lol.gif icon_lol.gif

Even scientists cannot agree ffs.

Still thanks for popping in..........ya can now pop back out again!!
 

 

1st Sep 2010 - 5:44pm
Bluefish2009's AvatarBluefish2009Godlike
Joined:
20 Jun 2009
Posts:
3944
Location:
Dorset
ProfilePM
kentswingers777 wrote:

I would like the climate change brigade to explain this....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1307782/Hot--farewell-coldest-August-17-years.html


I will be long dead when a real expert comes along with REAL proof, that actually ya know climate change was a load of old cobblers.

We are all being taken for fools..........


Not sure what the experts told you Kenty, but in my view it is because there is no such thing as man made climate change, or if there is its very small. What we are seeing is the natural change in our planet's climate.
 

 

1st Sep 2010 - 5:52pm
Kaznkev's AvatarKaznkevGodlike
Joined:
17 Sep 2009
Posts:
7494
Location:
Kneeling
ProfilePM
Bluefish2009 wrote:

kentswingers777 wrote:

I would like the climate change brigade to explain this....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1307782/Hot--farewell-coldest-August-17-years.html


I will be long dead when a real expert comes along with REAL proof, that actually ya know climate change was a load of old cobblers.

We are all being taken for fools..........


Not sure what the experts told you Kenty, but in my view it is because there is no such thing as man made climate change, or if there is its very small. What we are seeing is the natural change in our planet's climate.


Natural,do you mean one of the cyclic changes that occur?That may be the case,but the research shows that the current changes are sped up in the very least by the actions of man.

i subscribe to the gaia theory,the Earth will be fine,we just dont want it to go on without us.
 

 

1st Sep 2010 - 5:56pm
Bluefish2009's AvatarBluefish2009Godlike
Joined:
20 Jun 2009
Posts:
3944
Location:
Dorset
ProfilePM
Kaznkev wrote:

Bluefish2009 wrote:

kentswingers777 wrote:

I would like the climate change brigade to explain this....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1307782/Hot--farewell-coldest-August-17-years.html


I will be long dead when a real expert comes along with REAL proof, that actually ya know climate change was a load of old cobblers.

We are all being taken for fools..........


Not sure what the experts told you Kenty, but in my view it is because there is no such thing as man made climate change, or if there is its very small. What we are seeing is the natural change in our planet's climate.


Natural,do you mean one of the cyclic changes that occur?That may be the case,but the research shows that the current changes are sped up in the very least by the actions of man.
i subscribe to the gaia theory,the Earth will be fine,we just dont want it to go on without us.


Not all agree on this Kaz

*QUOTE*
Accurate satellite, balloon and mountain top observations made over the last three decades have not shown any significant change in the long term rate of increase in global temperatures. Average ground station readings do show a mild warming of 0.6 to 0.8Cover the last 100 years, which is well within the natural variations recorded in the last millennium. The ground station network suffers from an uneven distribution across the globe; the stations are preferentially located in growing urban and industrial areas ("heat islands"), which show substantially higher readings than adjacent rural areas ("land use effects").

There has been no catastrophic warming recorded.
 

 

1st Sep 2010 - 6:11pm
foxylady2209's Avatarfoxylady2209Godlike
Joined:
6 Jan 2005
Posts:
4069
Location:
Derby
ProfilePM
Bluefish2009 wrote:



Not all agree on this Kaz

*QUOTE*
Accurate satellite, balloon and mountain top observations made over the last three decades have not shown any significant change in the long term rate of increase in global temperatures. Average ground station readings do show a mild warming of 0.6 to 0.8Cover the last 100 years, which is well within the natural variations recorded in the last millennium. The ground station network suffers from an uneven distribution across the globe; the stations are preferentially located in growing urban and industrial areas ("heat islands"), which show substantially higher readings than adjacent rural areas ("land use effects").

There has been no catastrophic warming recorded.


An un-referenced quote is no more informative than anyone's opinion. Could you add the source of this quote so we can better judge it's applicability?

I'm not disagreeing with it - just asking for the source so I can validate it myself.
 

 

1st Sep 2010 - 6:15pm
Bluefish2009's AvatarBluefish2009Godlike
Joined:
20 Jun 2009
Posts:
3944
Location:
Dorset
ProfilePM
foxylady2209 wrote:

Bluefish2009 wrote:



Not all agree on this Kaz

*QUOTE*
Accurate satellite, balloon and mountain top observations made over the last three decades have not shown any significant change in the long term rate of increase in global temperatures. Average ground station readings do show a mild warming of 0.6 to 0.8Cover the last 100 years, which is well within the natural variations recorded in the last millennium. The ground station network suffers from an uneven distribution across the globe; the stations are preferentially located in growing urban and industrial areas ("heat islands"), which show substantially higher readings than adjacent rural areas ("land use effects").

There has been no catastrophic warming recorded.


An un-referenced quote is no more informative than anyone's opinion. Could you add the source of this quote so we can better judge it's applicability?

I'm not disagreeing with it - just asking for the source so I can validate it myself.


Sorry, thought I had icon_redface.gif

One moment

http://www.globalwarminghysteria.com/ten-myths-of-global-warming/

http://www.abd.org.uk/green_myths.htm

http://www.ourcivilisation.com/aginatur/swindle.htm
 

 

1st Sep 2010 - 7:09pm
kentswingers777's Avatarkentswingers777Godlike
Joined:
14 Dec 2005
Posts:
8462
Location:
-
ProfilePM
That's the spirit Blue.

No I was talking about the so called experts around here who think categorically it is happening.

No real proof either way but as I am a cynic where politicians and their ilk are concerned, I will go with the natural Earths way tyvm.
 

 

1st Sep 2010 - 7:23pm
Kaznkev's AvatarKaznkevGodlike
Joined:
17 Sep 2009
Posts:
7494
Location:
Kneeling
ProfilePM
Bluefish2009 wrote:

Kaznkev wrote:

Bluefish2009 wrote:

kentswingers777 wrote:

I would like the climate change brigade to explain this....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1307782/Hot--farewell-coldest-August-17-years.html


I will be long dead when a real expert comes along with REAL proof, that actually ya know climate change was a load of old cobblers.

We are all being taken for fools..........


Not sure what the experts told you Kenty, but in my view it is because there is no such thing as man made climate change, or if there is its very small. What we are seeing is the natural change in our planet's climate.


Natural,do you mean one of the cyclic changes that occur?That may be the case,but the research shows that the current changes are sped up in the very least by the actions of man.
i subscribe to the gaia theory,the Earth will be fine,we just dont want it to go on without us.


Not all agree on this Kaz

*QUOTE*
Accurate satellite, balloon and mountain top observations made over the last three decades have not shown any significant change in the long term rate of increase in global temperatures. Average ground station readings do show a mild warming of 0.6 to 0.8Cover the last 100 years, which is well within the natural variations recorded in the last millennium. The ground station network suffers from an uneven distribution across the globe; the stations are preferentially located in growing urban and industrial areas ("heat islands"), which show substantially higher readings than adjacent rural areas ("land use effects").

There has been no catastrophic warming recorded.


Finding 100% agreement in science is never going to happen,its the job of scientists to question data.However the majority think the same thing.That is not going to convince those whoi think one dissenting voice is enough,but remember there are scientists who will prove that intelligent design is better than Darwinism.
 

 

1st Sep 2010 - 8:27pm
Bluefish2009's AvatarBluefish2009Godlike
Joined:
20 Jun 2009
Posts:
3944
Location:
Dorset
ProfilePM
Kaznkev wrote:

Bluefish2009 wrote:

Kaznkev wrote:

Bluefish2009 wrote:

kentswingers777 wrote:

I would like the climate change brigade to explain this....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1307782/Hot--farewell-coldest-August-17-years.html


I will be long dead when a real expert comes along with REAL proof, that actually ya know climate change was a load of old cobblers.

We are all being taken for fools..........


Not sure what the experts told you Kenty, but in my view it is because there is no such thing as man made climate change, or if there is its very small. What we are seeing is the natural change in our planet's climate.


Natural,do you mean one of the cyclic changes that occur?That may be the case,but the research shows that the current changes are sped up in the very least by the actions of man.
i subscribe to the gaia theory,the Earth will be fine,we just dont want it to go on without us.


Not all agree on this Kaz

*QUOTE*
Accurate satellite, balloon and mountain top observations made over the last three decades have not shown any significant change in the long term rate of increase in global temperatures. Average ground station readings do show a mild warming of 0.6 to 0.8Cover the last 100 years, which is well within the natural variations recorded in the last millennium. The ground station network suffers from an uneven distribution across the globe; the stations are preferentially located in growing urban and industrial areas ("heat islands"), which show substantially higher readings than adjacent rural areas ("land use effects").

There has been no catastrophic warming recorded.


Finding 100% agreement in science is never going to happen,its the job of scientists to question data.However the majority think the same thing.That is not going to convince those whoi think one dissenting voice is enough,but remember there are scientists who will prove that intelligent design is better than Darwinism.


I suddenly lost all faith when I was told by the press and Government the the science was settled. As we all know science is never settled! This through a spanner in the works for me. From that day forth, I looked for others opinions. I find the main ones to agree are those paid by Government body's icon_wink.gif
 

 

1st Sep 2010 - 9:00pm
Kaznkev's AvatarKaznkevGodlike
Joined:
17 Sep 2009
Posts:
7494
Location:
Kneeling
ProfilePM
Bluefish2009 wrote:

Kaznkev wrote:

Bluefish2009 wrote:

Kaznkev wrote:

Bluefish2009 wrote:

kentswingers777 wrote:

I would like the climate change brigade to explain this....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1307782/Hot--farewell-coldest-August-17-years.html


I will be long dead when a real expert comes along with REAL proof, that actually ya know climate change was a load of old cobblers.

We are all being taken for fools..........


Not sure what the experts told you Kenty, but in my view it is because there is no such thing as man made climate change, or if there is its very small. What we are seeing is the natural change in our planet's climate.


Natural,do you mean one of the cyclic changes that occur?That may be the case,but the research shows that the current changes are sped up in the very least by the actions of man.
i subscribe to the gaia theory,the Earth will be fine,we just dont want it to go on without us.


Not all agree on this Kaz

*QUOTE*
Accurate satellite, balloon and mountain top observations made over the last three decades have not shown any significant change in the long term rate of increase in global temperatures. Average ground station readings do show a mild warming of 0.6 to 0.8Cover the last 100 years, which is well within the natural variations recorded in the last millennium. The ground station network suffers from an uneven distribution across the globe; the stations are preferentially located in growing urban and industrial areas ("heat islands"), which show substantially higher readings than adjacent rural areas ("land use effects").

There has been no catastrophic warming recorded.


Finding 100% agreement in science is never going to happen,its the job of scientists to question data.However the majority think the same thing.That is not going to convince those whoi think one dissenting voice is enough,but remember there are scientists who will prove that intelligent design is better than Darwinism.


I suddenly lost all faith when I was told by the press and Government the the science was settled. As we all know science is never settled! This through a spanner in the works for me. From that day forth, I looked for others opinions. I find the main ones to agree are those paid by Government body's icon_wink.gif


And the ones who disagree tend to be funded by oil companies,funny that.

i do agree with you that the way all governments present science is abysmal,as is the teaching of scientific method and stats in most schools.
 

 

1st Sep 2010 - 9:36pm
Bluefish2009's AvatarBluefish2009Godlike
Joined:
20 Jun 2009
Posts:
3944
Location:
Dorset
ProfilePM
Kaznkev wrote:

Bluefish2009 wrote:

[I suddenly lost all faith when I was told by the press and Government the the science was settled. As we all know science is never settled! This through a spanner in the works for me. From that day forth, I looked for others opinions. I find the main ones to agree are those paid by Government body's icon_wink.gif


And the ones who disagree tend to be funded by oil companies,funny that.

i do agree with you that the way all governments present science is abysmal,as is the teaching of scientific method and stats in most schools.


Good job we agree on some thing icon_wink.gif

But

*QUOTE*
Over 30,000 scientists signed a petition urging the United States to reject the Kyoto agreement, stating:

There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing, or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.

Additional petitions, such as the Manhattan Declaration on Climate Change included scientists and researchers in climate and related fields, economists, policymakers, and business leaders who had reviewed the evidence and affirmed that climate change is natural and normal and that carbon dioxide is not a “pollutant,” among other things.

Various surveys were conducted among scientists and practitioners in earth and atmospheric sciences showing much weaker support than warming propagandists had claimed. And then came Climategate, exposing the fraudulent science that had some scientists and so many non-scientists believing that something more had been going on than actually was. Belief in catastrophic man-made global warming dropped like a rock in all quarters.

http://www.climatechangefraud.com/enviro-extremists/7362-97-of-scientists-do-not-believe-in-the-theory-of-catastrophic-man-made-global-warming
 

 

8th Sep 2010 - 12:05pm
yorkiesmurf's AvataryorkiesmurfLook at meee
Joined:
19 Feb 2005
Posts:
42
Location:
North East
ProfilePM
I am one who does not believe in climate change and believe, as paranoid as it may sound, I believe it is being promoted as a way for taxation. Granted nobody wants a polluting industry by them, suffer ill-health from pollution, or die early because of pollution. For me I can remember the news media talking about us entering 10,000 year ice age in the early 70s, then during the late 70s - 80s it was acid rain along with CFC damaging the ozone, O3. Now the tide has reversed and it is climate change which a bit more obscure. What amazes me in almost no discussion about climate change does anyone talk about the influence of the aging sun along with other cosmic events our climate. It seems to me as though scientists who discuss this thinks we live in a vacuum free of any influence from the universe around us. My feeling is if climate changing is happening, it is tied to the effects of the sun which means cows, CO2, and other man-made products have no effect on it. It is time to leave the cows alone and begin focusing on issues that really matters like the economy, not climate change.
 

 

8th Sep 2010 - 7:52pm
Too Hot's AvatarToo HotSuper human rambling
Joined:
7 Oct 2005
Posts:
764
Location:
North West
ProfilePM
yorkiesmurf wrote:

I am one who does not believe in climate change and believe, as paranoid as it may sound, I believe it is being promoted as a way for taxation. Granted nobody wants a polluting industry by them, suffer ill-health from pollution, or die early because of pollution. For me I can remember the news media talking about us entering 10,000 year ice age in the early 70s, then during the late 70s - 80s it was acid rain along with CFC damaging the ozone, O3. Now the tide has reversed and it is climate change which a bit more obscure. What amazes me in almost no discussion about climate change does anyone talk about the influence of the aging sun along with other cosmic events our climate. It seems to me as though scientists who discuss this thinks we live in a vacuum free of any influence from the universe around us. My feeling is if climate changing is happening, it is tied to the effects of the sun which means cows, CO2, and other man-made products have no effect on it. It is time to leave the cows alone and begin focusing on issues that really matters like the economy, not climate change.


This is where the science falls apart. You have correctly identified logic and based your opinion on observations and experiences in your lifetime. You are correct.
 
Next »
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9
< >
Search