This artical puts some thought into whether it exists or we are all being taken for complete mugs.
NOBODY can come up with 100% proof that it even exists, and on that basis I have always kept my opinions bordering on the, taken for mugs opinion.
What IF we find out in 20 years time that it does not exist, and we have all been taken for a big money spinning ride?
Will we get our money back?
I think until it can be proved beyond any doubt, I will still think it is a natural Earth thing.
I cannot believe that all this rubbish about light bulbs makes any difference at all. You will not be able to but a 100 watt bulb soon, as apparently it can damage the world....sorry poppycock.
It is now THE major way of getting people to change innocent habits, whilst at the same time coining in loads more money from our pockets.
IF planes are so bad then why the heck do people travel all over the world on them, to go to enviromental meetings? A boat surely would be much better for the climate, but seems to me a case of " do as I say and not as I do "!
We have to stop using 100 watt bulbs yet China continue to spew out crap everyday of the year in vast ammounts, and they do not give a toss.
Do not leave your telly on standby as that is bad....in the wider scheme of things they make no difference whatsoever.
So.....real?.....or being taken for total muppets?
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
Climate change
last reply
172 replies
7.8k views
0 watchers
0 likes
Sex God
As you say, MMGW isn't proved.
But my feeling is that cutting down energy use is cheaper therefore a Good Thing. Recycling reduces production costs (if done right of course) and therefore a Good Thing.
Reducing our dependence on imported oil and gas is a Good Thing.
I have heard from people who say "I'm not going to insulate my house cos I don't believe in MMGW" That's just daft. There are far better reasons than MMGW to reduce our energy use/dependency.
Oh and there was no proof that smoking = lung cancer but I don't think anyone disagrees nowadays. Absence of evidence doesn't prove absence of effect.
But my feeling is that cutting down energy use is cheaper therefore a Good Thing. Recycling reduces production costs (if done right of course) and therefore a Good Thing.
Reducing our dependence on imported oil and gas is a Good Thing.
I have heard from people who say "I'm not going to insulate my house cos I don't believe in MMGW" That's just daft. There are far better reasons than MMGW to reduce our energy use/dependency.
Oh and there was no proof that smoking = lung cancer but I don't think anyone disagrees nowadays. Absence of evidence doesn't prove absence of effect.
Whilst I DON'T believe that Humans are completely responsible for Climate change, there are things that Humans have done to make matters worse. A lot of people don't seem to realise that the Planets climate pattern is a CYCLE. Due to the way that it revolves around the sun, over thousands of years we get closer and closer to it, resulting in the temperature etc rising. After a few thousand years, it will then move further and further away.
It would seem that we are at the end of an "Ice age" which would explain the sharp decrease in global ice. I think that once again, information has been misinterpreted and panic is the result due to Humankind not having records to show previous Ice ages.
It is everyone's responsibility to take the information and make an INFORMED decision on what to do to make our effects on the planet less damaging. To say that we are COMPLETELY responsible is misinformed - to say the least. As for the monetary aspect - well Kenty, you know someone will make a quick buck out of any situation
It would seem that we are at the end of an "Ice age" which would explain the sharp decrease in global ice. I think that once again, information has been misinterpreted and panic is the result due to Humankind not having records to show previous Ice ages.
It is everyone's responsibility to take the information and make an INFORMED decision on what to do to make our effects on the planet less damaging. To say that we are COMPLETELY responsible is misinformed - to say the least. As for the monetary aspect - well Kenty, you know someone will make a quick buck out of any situation
Sex God
I do not believe humans are responsible in any way, shape or form for climate change. Yes it is happening but I do not believe it to be our fault at all.
The government have jumped upon the band wagon purely to make you feel guilty and to weasel your money from your back pocket in the name of saving the planet
The government have jumped upon the band wagon purely to make you feel guilty and to weasel your money from your back pocket in the name of saving the planet
There's another issue afoot though. While we may not be responsible for climate change (although I do think we're not exactly helping.) We are conspicuously overconsuming finite resources.
And, for the record- our eldest is a student passionate about doing what she can to help protect our fragile environment. She may be off to Copenhagen- but will only do so if she can avoid flying. Moreover, last summer she was offered a free holiday at a friends place in Portugal. She turned it down because the logistics meant she would have had to fly. Not all environmentalists are hypocrites.
And, for the record- our eldest is a student passionate about doing what she can to help protect our fragile environment. She may be off to Copenhagen- but will only do so if she can avoid flying. Moreover, last summer she was offered a free holiday at a friends place in Portugal. She turned it down because the logistics meant she would have had to fly. Not all environmentalists are hypocrites.
Sex God
Personally, I think that the rich and the powerful who subscribe to the climate change theory are like King Canute. They are so vain and so full of themselves that they simply have to believe that man is capable/responsible for what goes on with the natural world. Is man so great and so clever that he can affect the natural cycles of the planet?
If you have an hour and a half or so to spare and don't mind a bit of political rhetoric watch this. Ignore that political spouting and listen to some of the facts and counter arguments.
Dont disagree with anyone about the benefits of being frugal and recycling but the biggest culprits are NOT in this country.
If you have an hour and a half or so to spare and don't mind a bit of political rhetoric watch this. Ignore that political spouting and listen to some of the facts and counter arguments.
Dont disagree with anyone about the benefits of being frugal and recycling but the biggest culprits are NOT in this country.
Quote by Too Hot
Personally, I think that the rich and the powerful who subscribe to the climate change theory are like King Canute. They are so vain and so full of themselves that they simply have to believe that man is capable/responsible for what goes on with the natural world. Is man so great and so clever that he can affect the natural cycles of the planet?
If you have an hour and a half or so to spare and don't mind a bit of political rhetoric watch this. Ignore that political spouting and listen to some of the facts and counter arguments.
Dont disagree with anyone about the benefits of being frugal and recycling but the biggest culprits are NOT in this country.
How about this one then..
Apparently, even the Saudi's are concerned about climate change but from the other perspective.
When the world starts using less oil, the Saudi's expect to be compensated for loss of income :shock:
You really couldn't make this up, could you!
Orgasminator
What really gets me is when those in positions of influence are clearly just hypocits. For instance Bono & his band U2 have been confirmed as the headliners on the friday night at Glastonbury next year.
All well and good you may think, as Glastonbury is a "green" fundraiser. However him and his entourage are interrupting their American tour to return to the UK for this one show! Burning tonnes of fuel over the Atlantic.
FFS come on Bono, stop spouting all this eco crap and let your actions speak for themselves before you disappear up your own backside!
All well and good you may think, as Glastonbury is a "green" fundraiser. However him and his entourage are interrupting their American tour to return to the UK for this one show! Burning tonnes of fuel over the Atlantic.
FFS come on Bono, stop spouting all this eco crap and let your actions speak for themselves before you disappear up your own backside!
Sex God
It depends where you get your information from....most independant climatologists make a connection between human activity and climate change,the majority of those that don't make this connection when the money trail is followed tend to have been funded by oil and energy companies....odd that.
Quote by Staggerlee_BB
It depends where you get your information from....most independant climatologists make a connection between human activity and climate change,the majority of those that don't make this connection when the money trail is followed tend to have been funded by oil and energy companies....odd that.
Would be interesting to see where those stats come from Staggers. The whole Climate Change bandwaggon has been hijacked by the politicians and is now nothing more than a huge government cash cow.
It would be interesting to see where the funding has come from for the so called "independant" climatologists.
Global warming eh?
Sex God
It depends where you get your information from....most independant climatologists make a connection between human activity and climate change,the majority of those that don't make this connection when the money trail is followed tend to have been funded by oil and energy companies....odd that.[/quote
Maybe it would be interesting to follow the money trail back on the climatologists that make a connection between human activity and climate change, maybe they could be government funded... just a thought
Maybe it would be interesting to follow the money trail back on the climatologists that make a connection between human activity and climate change, maybe they could be government funded... just a thought
I believe the climate has been changing since the beginning of time and always will change. These politicians who believe they can stop it happening are fantasists, they can't even prevent things from happening on the ground let alone in the atmosphere. Still the blind do follow the blind and turkeys do vote for Christmas.
All becomes clear when you consider that controlling emissions means that you have to control people.
The goal of politicians is to have total control over all people.
AGW is being used to bring about control.
The GREEN parties idea of control is a UK population reduced to 16 million (a sustainable number)
Of course, this cannot be realised by birth control, since controlling the birth rate to reduce the population means that the ration of old:young will be dramatically altered.
So the only population control that will work is reduction by increasing the death rate.
You work it out.
If UK emissions are to be reduced to 1950 levels we will have to close practically all conventionally fuelled power stations. If we are not to build more nuclear stations (we need at least 30 more, ideally 45-50) then we are in deep shit.
The goal of politicians is to have total control over all people.
AGW is being used to bring about control.
The GREEN parties idea of control is a UK population reduced to 16 million (a sustainable number)
Of course, this cannot be realised by birth control, since controlling the birth rate to reduce the population means that the ration of old:young will be dramatically altered.
So the only population control that will work is reduction by increasing the death rate.
You work it out.
If UK emissions are to be reduced to 1950 levels we will have to close practically all conventionally fuelled power stations. If we are not to build more nuclear stations (we need at least 30 more, ideally 45-50) then we are in deep shit.
Quote by Kaznkev
I am unable to see exactly what a great cash cow for govenments climate change is
And why is returning to old fashioned values of make do and mend attacked by those who normally want to tun back the clock?
Next time you fly, have a look at your ticket and see just how much the government is taxing you for the privilage. They claim this is a "green tax" but in essence it is just another way of raising revenues, none of which is ringfenced for green issues.
The same "green issue argument" will no doubt be used in the not too distant future to further increase the taxation on motorists and anyone/thing else that it can be extended to.
Sex God
I am unable to see exactly what a great cash cow for govenments climate change is
Green Taxes
Green Taxes
Sex God
But it's not getting warmer
Quote by Kaznkev
I am unable to see exactly what a great cash cow for govenments climate change is
And why is returning to old fashioned values of make do and mend attacked by those who normally want to tun back the clock?
Old fashioned values are all well and good, but IF you need a new sofa, are you going to keep mending it? To what purpose?
The ammount of money the Government raises through it's " green taxes " is exactly the same as the road tax.
It starts off all well and good, like the money will go towards repairing the roads. Yeah right....only about 22% of money raised goes towards the roads, the rest goes into the Governments coffers. The Green taxes will be NO different.
They will make out it is all for the environment, but we all know how they manipulate and lie through their teeth.
It is another stealth tax, to go with all the others.
Plus the hypocrite Bono don't even get me started on people like him, or two Jags!!
Sex God
Quote by Witchy
But it's not getting warmer
Perhaps it should be called Global Drenching :dunno:
:giggle:
at last your on to something kenty.
of 3000 climatologist worldwide, many who have questioned the principle of the heating up of the planet based on carbon emissions from the burning of fossil fuels, have been sacked. only a tiny few expound the theory of the burning of fossil fuels being the cause of what was initially called global warming, now called climate change because "it's not". climate change and the "carbon tax" based on our carbon footprint is a fraud. those who have called for the data to prove climate change caused by the increased volume of carbon dioxide and monoxides have up until now, been refused access. the hackers have done a great job. the establishment now admits that not only data, but a CONSPIRACY to ridicule genuine researchers has been outed. reuters, a.p. bbc, washington post etc.
its about a tax on every human being, to be paid to central banks and governments to fund a "new world order" via the u.n. dont you think it was also strange that the w.h.o. changed the criteria of what constitutes a "pandemic" in april this year and then hysteria over the a-h1n1 hit the media. research this con as much as you can kenty. you will also find some things out that you dont want to believe. keep your mind open. thanks for raising the issue. had i have done so, some would call me a conspiracy theorist.
of 3000 climatologist worldwide, many who have questioned the principle of the heating up of the planet based on carbon emissions from the burning of fossil fuels, have been sacked. only a tiny few expound the theory of the burning of fossil fuels being the cause of what was initially called global warming, now called climate change because "it's not". climate change and the "carbon tax" based on our carbon footprint is a fraud. those who have called for the data to prove climate change caused by the increased volume of carbon dioxide and monoxides have up until now, been refused access. the hackers have done a great job. the establishment now admits that not only data, but a CONSPIRACY to ridicule genuine researchers has been outed. reuters, a.p. bbc, washington post etc.
its about a tax on every human being, to be paid to central banks and governments to fund a "new world order" via the u.n. dont you think it was also strange that the w.h.o. changed the criteria of what constitutes a "pandemic" in april this year and then hysteria over the a-h1n1 hit the media. research this con as much as you can kenty. you will also find some things out that you dont want to believe. keep your mind open. thanks for raising the issue. had i have done so, some would call me a conspiracy theorist.
Of course it isn't getting warmer: Yet.
But according to those that "know", it will start again in 10/15/20/25/30/etc years.
Meanwhile, the recently hacked hadley cru files reveal a nest of deception and lies.
Not to worry....AGW has gone the way of the dodo, it is now CLIMATE CHANGE, a win-win scenario, since climate has always changed (one way or the other)the adherents of climate change cannot be wrong.. !
Meanwhile: the Uk will have to rely on the wind blowing (at 15-25 mph) and the sun shining (with possibly a little help from the tide).
with most of the present nuclear capacity due to be "retired" by 2015 and the new (possibly) capacity (nuclear) coming on-stream in about 2020 (and not enough) we will just have to hope.
Oh, and the coal-fired station may have to close about 2015 as well....to meet the requirements of emission control.
Meanwhile, the present level of CO2 is about 380ppm. Down somewhat from the 7000ppm of 500 million years ago.
95% of CO2 is caused by natural processes.
95% of "climate change madness" is caused by a need for higher salaries and pensions plus ego-building-publicity (not to mention cash, cash and control)
But according to those that "know", it will start again in 10/15/20/25/30/etc years.
Meanwhile, the recently hacked hadley cru files reveal a nest of deception and lies.
Not to worry....AGW has gone the way of the dodo, it is now CLIMATE CHANGE, a win-win scenario, since climate has always changed (one way or the other)the adherents of climate change cannot be wrong.. !
Meanwhile: the Uk will have to rely on the wind blowing (at 15-25 mph) and the sun shining (with possibly a little help from the tide).
with most of the present nuclear capacity due to be "retired" by 2015 and the new (possibly) capacity (nuclear) coming on-stream in about 2020 (and not enough) we will just have to hope.
Oh, and the coal-fired station may have to close about 2015 as well....to meet the requirements of emission control.
Meanwhile, the present level of CO2 is about 380ppm. Down somewhat from the 7000ppm of 500 million years ago.
95% of CO2 is caused by natural processes.
95% of "climate change madness" is caused by a need for higher salaries and pensions plus ego-building-publicity (not to mention cash, cash and control)
Quote by gulsonroad30664
at last your on to something kenty.
of 3000 climatologist worldwide, many who have questioned the principle of the heating up of the planet based on carbon emissions from the burning of fossil fuels, have been sacked. only a tiny few expound the theory of the burning of fossil fuels being the cause of what was initially called global warming, now called climate change because "it's not". climate change and the "carbon tax" based on our carbon footprint is a fraud. those who have called for the data to prove climate change caused by the increased volume of carbon dioxide and monoxides have up until now, been refused access. the hackers have done a great job. the establishment now admits that not only data, but a CONSPIRACY to ridicule genuine researchers has been outed. reuters, a.p. bbc, washington post etc.
its about a tax on every human being, to be paid to central banks and governments to fund a "new world order" via the u.n. dont you think it was also strange that the w.h.o. changed the criteria of what constitutes a "pandemic" in april this year and then hysteria over the a-h1n1 hit the media. research this con as much as you can kenty. you will also find some things out that you dont want to believe. keep your mind open. thanks for raising the issue. had i have done so, some would call me a conspiracy theorist.
Well I'm impressed that you have managed to link 3 conspiricies in one post!!
Quote by samson63
... Bono & his band U2 have been confirmed as the headliners on the friday night at Glastonbury next year.
All well and good you may think, as Glastonbury is a "green" fundraiser. However him and his entourage are interrupting their American tour to return to the UK for this one show! Burning tonnes of fuel over the Atlantic.
Be even more if he has to send another plane for his hat.
carbon dioxide is exhaled by us, consumed by plants that create oxygen. the carbon tax is very soon to go before congress and they are likely to pass it. in the carbon tax bill is provision to tax farmers by head of cattle that emit (fart) carbon gas.
the temperature and weather of the planet is far more affected by the activity of the sun than ever it is by carbon emissions. the climate of the planet has change repeatedly in times past hot and cold both during and before human activity. climate change and carbon tax are a scam.
the temperature and weather of the planet is far more affected by the activity of the sun than ever it is by carbon emissions. the climate of the planet has change repeatedly in times past hot and cold both during and before human activity. climate change and carbon tax are a scam.
Sex God
some interesting articles here about funding media spin etc.
Sex God
Quote by Max777
some interesting articles here about funding media spin etc.
not really a balanced viewpoint though!
oh ? I thought they seemed fairly even handed...prepared to debunk any dubious claims
Quote by Staggerlee_BB
some interesting articles here about funding media spin etc.
not really a balanced viewpoint though!
oh ? I thought they seemed fairly even handed...prepared to debunk any dubious claims
The site obviously has its own agenda. It does not state where any pro climate changers get their funding from.
Let's put it this way.....there are two academics, one pro climate change and the other a sceptic. Which one will find it much easier to receive government funding and which one will have to look elsewhere?
Sex God
I think the main problem is that while it's clear that global warming is happening for one reason or another, and the recent revelations about the alleged methods used by a particular scientist, or group of scientists does not detract from the wealth of evidence to support that as a whole, it's almost impossible to prove beyond doubt that warming is at least in part driven by man's activities. It's equally difficult to prove that it's not. Seems then we have two options . . . we can either decide that it is man made to an extent, and attempt do something about it, or we can decide that man's activities have nothing to do with it, and do nothing.
If we're wrong in the first instance, all that will have happened is that we'll have spent a whole load of time, energy and money forcing industry to reduce their output of atmospheric pollutants and greenhouse gases, and be a bit more circumspect in their use of finite natural resources, and forcing individual people in the developed world to be a bit more considered with their life-syle choices, and develop more sustainable habits, none of which is a bad thing in itself. Maybe we'll have come up with a few new technologies that might otherwise have taken longer to develop were it not for the urgency of the project. If we're wrong in the second instance, well, we just better not be wrong if we choose to do nothing, eh, cos we will quite literally reap the whirlwind? I'm not a betting man, but I think I know which bet I'd sooner take.
Neil x x x ;)
If we're wrong in the first instance, all that will have happened is that we'll have spent a whole load of time, energy and money forcing industry to reduce their output of atmospheric pollutants and greenhouse gases, and be a bit more circumspect in their use of finite natural resources, and forcing individual people in the developed world to be a bit more considered with their life-syle choices, and develop more sustainable habits, none of which is a bad thing in itself. Maybe we'll have come up with a few new technologies that might otherwise have taken longer to develop were it not for the urgency of the project. If we're wrong in the second instance, well, we just better not be wrong if we choose to do nothing, eh, cos we will quite literally reap the whirlwind? I'm not a betting man, but I think I know which bet I'd sooner take.
Neil x x x ;)
