greg_hill

@Badger Well it's always good to investigate and confirm facts for yourself, but the evidence for the MWP is overwhelming. Many reports in many journals from a wide variety of scientists using various types of proxy dating have confirmed this. Almost every major country in the world has evidence of a MWP. That's not in any way meant to denigrate this new study, I think it's a good thing. @ Paul C, the link to that article doesn't work and google only gives me copies from web forums, etc. I think it's important we bear in mind that global warming / climate change and anthropogenic climate change are different things entirely. There is some evidence that the ice caps are receding in some areas. There is some evidence that some species of animals are migrating due to climate change. None of this shows that human activity is responsible, If co2 emissions are driving up climate, surely the trend would be linear and strong. In fact, temperatures have dropped over the last six years or so and will likely fluctuate over the next six. This seems to me to be entirely in keeping with a long term warming trend following the little ice age in the seventeenth century. The recession of the ice caps also fits in with this. The evidence for co2 emissions causing any of this is very, very weak.

William Connelly and others were - and are - responsible for weighing very heavy criticism of respected scientists who disagree with their theories and giving disproportionate coverage to lesser achieving scientists who agree with them. An example I know of from first hand experience: Connelly or one of his colleagues removed a citation of co2science.org - a site run by a university scholar and his sons who are both phd's - from a Wikipedia article. The stated reason was: 'they cannot be considered reliable'. In the same article, Connelly listed his own website as a cited source! He even removed my message on the discussion page asking if such behaviour was not a conflict of interests for a website that should present a balanced view. The Mediaeval Warm Period is made to look highly questionable in the Wiki article. In reality there are hundreds of respected papers from various sources around the world that present very strong evidence that it occurred.

"You would have thought the scientists employed by oil and energy companies with all their financial backing would have found a concrete scientific theory to disprove man made global warming by now wouldn't you?" You can't prove a negative. I cannot prove that there are no goblins living in my garden. I can only show you that there is absolutely no evidence to support the idea. MMGW is similar. The IPCC have been throwing out warning about GW for some years now. Each time their warnings do not come to fruition, they change them. I do believe that we are on our fourth warning that this year's increase in temperature will be unprecedented. I understand the scepticism and feelings that 'everyone in this debate has an agenda' but the beauty of science is that, ultimately, it cannot be influenced by politics. Eventually, it will become obvious that we are either pushing temperatures up drastically or we are not. However, let's bear in mind that the IPCC leader has had billions of dollars worth of investments in energy companies exposed by the media. Someone with such a clear conflict of interests should consider his position untenable IMHO. I'm not a scientist, but having taken the time to read up extensively on this issue (though not on this thread) I have come to the conclusion that anthropogenic factors will only account for a net average increase of 0.7 degrees over the next one hundred years or so. The money we are pouring into this problem could be spent in so many better ways. I invite questions or challenges to my theory :-)

Of course, it doesn't matter who is a potential buyer and how much cash they have if it isn't done within he next ten days. Mind you, the way the EPL have bent over for Pompey, I'm sure the formalities will be completed ASAP. "Yes Mister Bin Laden, the fit and proper person procedure has been concluded and approved......"

Still no response to my question, which I felt was important: If Pompey produce a feeble statement of affairs by the dealine of next Weds but AFTER that, they are taken over by some tycoon, will the judge still wind them up based on the SOA?

Question about the 'statement of affairs' Pompey are forced to present: What happens if the SOA shows Pompey are insolvent but the jammy gits get taken over by a rich person AFTER next Wednesday but before the hearing on March 1st? In other words, would the judge wind up the club based on the fact that they clearly were trading while insolvent or allow them to survive based on what happened between that time and the court hearing?

It hurts like hell but at least we will still have a club to support before the next round is played. As has been widely noted, we matched them - if not bettered them - for large parts of the game. David James was excellent (git) and but for just slightly better finishing from our boys or slightly less of a good games for James and it could have been so, so different. Still, we did ourselves proud and the players have to look forward to a strong league finish and a day at Wembley. Let us worry about the flak from the blue few. Things will have changed a lot by the next time we meet.

We have the superior record of FA Cup clashes with our local rivals.

Strange, when I search under 'sport' it lists the channel as ESPN. However, as you both rightly say, it seems the correct channel is TS3. Yet more lazy mistakes from True.

"Stones fans celebrating the relegation of Harrow Borough " ??????

On ESPN in Thailand. Starting 1925.

Can anyone confirm the current status of takeaways in the Bitterne Park Triangle? There used to be one good chippy run by a Greek (I think) family. Really nice people. The 'laughing Paki' is the one who started a fight with me when I declined to put some money in his hat, I believe.

Fine with me. Pompey's execs have lied, spun and ignored reality throughout this saga in a way any politician would be proud of. They have this last reprieve because Storrie spun yet another tale about new ownership. Now he has just seven days to put up or be proven for the liar who put Pompey on the scrap heap. We could be the last game they ever play. This season is feeling more like a dream as each week goes by.

How do we know they are 'serious'? Because Peter 'We have not received a WUO, the transfer ban will be lifted yesterday, we will have very good news by last year at the latest' Storrie says so?

What really annoys me is the mix of platitudes and outright untruths (am I allowed to call him a liar?) he is spitting out. Potential buyers? Really? How strange they came forward now and not several months ago. How convenient that all this talk just now could well buy you a 28 day reprieve. I just hope HMRC have the professionalism to actually check the substance behind all that talk. "The club belongs to the fans, etc. ,etc." Yes it does. So why did you and your cronies mistreat it so badly?

+1 , I'm always saddened by this kind of gratutious negativity. "This is NOT a Pardew out thread but........." I DON'T want you to think about a pink elephant right now but..........

Seriously, people are going to moan about a one off special shirt without a sponsor to commemorate our football heritage? There really is no pleasing some people. I love the one off design and look forward to buying a shirt.Thank you NC.

BTW Can anyone else work out if the most recent change of owner is good or bad for Pompey? I can't.

If so then Pompey's troubles will only get worse. Thaksin is due for trial in absentia at the end of this month in the Thailand Supreme Court. If found guilty - and he will be, for political reasons - a huge chunk of his financial assets will be conviscated.

But presumably they were only given the news on the basis that it was confidential for at least 24 hours. So ethics comes into play. Cortese to Milan wasn't nonsense was it? An approach was made.

They've denied every bit of reality all the way through this mess. They even pretended the WUO had not been received!

On the other hand, how many 'saviours' for both Saints and now Pompey either failed to materialise or suddenly realised they had no funds? Let's also bear in mind it wouldn't hurt Pompey to 'encourage' rumours of big money investors shortly before their WUO comes to court. After all, they've spouted nothing but lies and double bluffs throughout this whole sorry saga.

Latest BBC report says Stoke are now in for Bergovic for two million. That seems a knock down price. How much will it actually help the skates?

I'm slightly confused now. I was unaware that a WUO prevented a club going into administration though now you point it out, it makes obvious sense. What other options do the club and/or HMRC have?

I think you may misunderstand the meaning of the word 'fact'.