badgerx16 Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 Found it; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPvU1vJ29C4&feature=player_embedded Fonzie does his St G impression at about 1:47 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joensuu Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 Just occurred to me how odd it is that us nanny-state loving quasi-communists are keener on individual liberty than all the freedom-loving capitalists. Hmm. It's often struck me as strange too, I mean, why would anyone want the public to be heavily regulated, but companies to be as unrestricted as possible? I think it stems from people on the right assuming that 'other' people cause problems, and that more restrictive personal legislation will only affect 'other' people. Of course, as soon as someone on the right is caught breaking the law they quickly begin to wish that they had a bit more individual freedom. Likewise, it's always fun to watch 'not in my backyard' Tories using every bit of corporate legislation that they can unearth, to try and stop a wind farm being constructed in their neck of the woods. It's almost as if they abandon their illogical political stance whenever it suits them, which leads me to believe that the stance isn't genuinely held, and is simply a position of convenience. [NB - at least libertarian Tories have a consistent position.] I believe that the key word is 'tax'. When you boil it down, the left/right debate is about how selfish you are: people on the left tend to put people before profit; whereas on the right the opposite is true. People on the right, don't actually want to see unregulated companies combined with and restrictive personal laws, they simply don't like paying tax to support others. [NB - of course people on the right don't mind a jot about restrictive social legislation, so long as they themselves aren't restricted ('What you mean the speed limit applies to me too?')] Anyhow, whether on the left or right, anyone above the centre line in the chart has a scary fondness for being regulated and restricted. I'm not sure whether they have some form of image of themselves being different from the masses (e.g. brandishing a whip on a slave galley), or whether they masochistically love being ordered about - either way, they must be scary messed up people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint George Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 BTW Folks...This is what the UN's IPCC and your tree hugging friends have in store for y'all...not that you're already more than half way there tho'...mainly thanks to the Minty's of the world Aint y'all glad that the peeps who provided all the Data and models etc for this oncoming policy have been proved to be upstanding pillars of honesty and integrety.....Oh wait! Enjoy the party....Thankfully, we on this side of the pond won't be attending...... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/6683735/Climate-change-Hefty-taxes-and-monitoring-needed-says-expert.html Climate change: 'Hefty taxes and monitoring needed', says expert The West must undergo a radical lifestyle change to prevent a global warming disaster, the world's leading climate change scientist has said. By Amy Willis Published: 8:00AM GMT 30 Nov 2009 Rajendra Pachauri, head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), says radical changes are needed to avoid a climate change disaster. Photo: EPA Rajendra Pachauri, the chairman of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), said imposing hefty taxes and increasing electrity monitoring is needed to combat the ways of adults who have been "corrupted" by their daily routines. Dr Pachauri caused controversy last year after suggesting people should eat less meat due to the levels of carbon emissions associated with rearing livestock. His latest suggestions include curbing car use, increasing London's congestion charge to £25, putting electricity monitoring equipment in hotel rooms and implementing hefty aviation taxes to stop people flying. In an interview with the Observer Dr Pachauri said: "Today we have reached the point where consumption and people's desire to consume has grown out of proportion. The reality is that our lifestyles are unsustainable. "I don't see why you couldn't have a meter in the room to register your energy consumption from air-conditioning or heating and you should be charged for that. "By bringing about changes of this kind, you could really ensure that people start becoming accountable for their actions." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorpe-le-Saint Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 BTW Folks...This is what the UN's IPCC and your tree hugging friends have in store for y'all...not that you're already more than half way there tho'...mainly thanks to the Minty's of the world Aint y'all glad that the peeps who provided all the Data and models etc for this oncoming policy have been proved to be upstanding pillars of honesty and integrety.....Oh wait! Enjoy the party....Thankfully, we on this side of the pond won't be attending...... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/6683735/Climate-change-Hefty-taxes-and-monitoring-needed-says-expert.html Climate change: 'Hefty taxes and monitoring needed', says expert The West must undergo a radical lifestyle change to prevent a global warming disaster, the world's leading climate change scientist has said. By Amy Willis Published: 8:00AM GMT 30 Nov 2009 Rajendra Pachauri, head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), says radical changes are needed to avoid a climate change disaster. Photo: EPA Rajendra Pachauri, the chairman of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), said imposing hefty taxes and increasing electrity monitoring is needed to combat the ways of adults who have been "corrupted" by their daily routines. Dr Pachauri caused controversy last year after suggesting people should eat less meat due to the levels of carbon emissions associated with rearing livestock. His latest suggestions include curbing car use, increasing London's congestion charge to £25, putting electricity monitoring equipment in hotel rooms and implementing hefty aviation taxes to stop people flying. In an interview with the Observer Dr Pachauri said: "Today we have reached the point where consumption and people's desire to consume has grown out of proportion. The reality is that our lifestyles are unsustainable. "I don't see why you couldn't have a meter in the room to register your energy consumption from air-conditioning or heating and you should be charged for that. "By bringing about changes of this kind, you could really ensure that people start becoming accountable for their actions." Nope, you won't be attending. You and the rest of your redneck chums will sit by obliviously raping the planet, but hey, if it doesn't affect you, (Oh sorry, y'all - you *****ing ***) directly St.G then who cares right? Thank God Obama has SOME integrity. I really hope, like the health reforms, he really pushes any climate bills he wants passed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintfully Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 BTW Folks...This is what the UN's IPCC and your tree hugging friends have in store for y'all...not that you're already more than half way there tho'...mainly thanks to the Minty's of the world Aint y'all glad that the peeps who provided all the Data and models etc for this oncoming policy have been proved to be upstanding pillars of honesty and integrety.....Oh wait! Enjoy the party....Thankfully, we on this side of the pond won't be attending...... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/6683735/Climate-change-Hefty-taxes-and-monitoring-needed-says-expert.html Climate change: 'Hefty taxes and monitoring needed', says expert The West must undergo a radical lifestyle change to prevent a global warming disaster, the world's leading climate change scientist has said. By Amy Willis Published: 8:00AM GMT 30 Nov 2009 Rajendra Pachauri, head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), says radical changes are needed to avoid a climate change disaster. Photo: EPA Rajendra Pachauri, the chairman of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), said imposing hefty taxes and increasing electrity monitoring is needed to combat the ways of adults who have been "corrupted" by their daily routines. Dr Pachauri caused controversy last year after suggesting people should eat less meat due to the levels of carbon emissions associated with rearing livestock. His latest suggestions include curbing car use, increasing London's congestion charge to £25, putting electricity monitoring equipment in hotel rooms and implementing hefty aviation taxes to stop people flying. In an interview with the Observer Dr Pachauri said: "Today we have reached the point where consumption and people's desire to consume has grown out of proportion. The reality is that our lifestyles are unsustainable. "I don't see why you couldn't have a meter in the room to register your energy consumption from air-conditioning or heating and you should be charged for that. "By bringing about changes of this kind, you could really ensure that people start becoming accountable for their actions." "Obamas coming to get you!" Your clocks ticking St George... scared much ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joensuu Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 Enjoy the party....Thankfully, we on this side of the pond won't be attending...... Quite right! Glad the USA has recognised that Climate Change isn't a trivial issue. There's certainly no reason for anyone to be throwing a party (celebrating climate change would be a bit like celebrating global poverty, or mass murder). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 I wasn't aware that people like Saint George existed outside of films. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bungle Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 BTW Folks...This is what the UN's IPCC and your tree hugging friends have in store for y'all...not that you're already more than half way there tho'...mainly thanks to the Minty's of the world Aint y'all glad that the peeps who provided all the Data and models etc for this oncoming policy have been proved to be upstanding pillars of honesty and integrety.....Oh wait! Enjoy the party....Thankfully, we on this side of the pond won't be attending...... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/6683735/Climate-change-Hefty-taxes-and-monitoring-needed-says-expert.html Climate change: 'Hefty taxes and monitoring needed', says expert The West must undergo a radical lifestyle change to prevent a global warming disaster, the world's leading climate change scientist has said. By Amy Willis Published: 8:00AM GMT 30 Nov 2009 Rajendra Pachauri, head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), says radical changes are needed to avoid a climate change disaster. Photo: EPA Rajendra Pachauri, the chairman of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), said imposing hefty taxes and increasing electrity monitoring is needed to combat the ways of adults who have been "corrupted" by their daily routines. Dr Pachauri caused controversy last year after suggesting people should eat less meat due to the levels of carbon emissions associated with rearing livestock. His latest suggestions include curbing car use, increasing London's congestion charge to £25, putting electricity monitoring equipment in hotel rooms and implementing hefty aviation taxes to stop people flying. In an interview with the Observer Dr Pachauri said: "Today we have reached the point where consumption and people's desire to consume has grown out of proportion. The reality is that our lifestyles are unsustainable. "I don't see why you couldn't have a meter in the room to register your energy consumption from air-conditioning or heating and you should be charged for that. "By bringing about changes of this kind, you could really ensure that people start becoming accountable for their actions." Good. We should tax heavy polluters. These are good starting points for discussion. Hopefully you would end up being taxed 110% of your income. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint George Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 "Obamas coming to get you!" Your clocks ticking St George... scared much ? LOL, Looks like you're as ignorant about American politics as you are Climate Change. Obama's nothing but a lame duck at Copehagen...All his huffing and puffing about AGW is aimed at no one other than the Dim and Gullible, all for the consumption of peeps like you. Fortunately we have a set of robust democratic checks and balances here, put in place to prevent radicals like Obama from running wild, like the Commies did in Britain back in the 60's and 70's...... He can't do a damned thing without a 2/3 Senate majority and he's nowhere near getting that, or anything even close....Hell, he was so so far off, the whole domestic Cap and Trade bill had to be shelved until next year and that was 'Before' Climategate.... And statements like the latest one from the UN above will be like a red rag to a bull over here....I'm sure we'll be hearing plenty more at Copenhagen too....cant wait The way the bottom's fallen out of Obama's rating's, he'll be going down as the fastest lame duck President in US history.... PS ...Enjoy your "Hefty taxes and UN monitoring control"...i'm sure it will be just what you always wanted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFrost Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 LOL, Looks like you're as ignorant about American politics as you are Climate Change. Obama's nothing but a lame duck at Copehagen...All his huffing and puffing about AGW is aimed at no one other than the Dim and Gullible, all for the consumption of peeps like you. Fortunately we have a set of robust democratic checks and balances here, put in place to prevent radicals like Obama from running wild, like the Commies did in Britain back in the 60's and 70's...... He can't do a damned thing without a 2/3 Senate majority and he's nowhere near getting that, or anything even close....Hell, he was so so far off, the whole domestic Cap and Trade bill had to be shelved until next year and that was 'Before' Climategate.... And statements like the latest one from the UN above will be like a red rag to a bull over here....I'm sure we'll be hearing plenty more at Copenhagen too....cant wait The way the bottom's fallen out of Obama's rating's, he'll be going down as the fastest lame duck President in US history.... PS ...Enjoy your "Hefty taxes and UN monitoring control"...i'm sure it will be just what you always wanted are you Melanie Phillips? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joensuu Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 The way the bottom's fallen out of Obama's rating's, he'll be going down as the fastest lame duck President in US history.... The lowest Obama's ratings have yet got to is 48% - He has a long way to go before he hits the low twenties like Nixon, Truman and Dubya did! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_approval_rating Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheaf Saint Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 Still waiting for you to answer my questions St George. If you could just take 30 seconds out from throwing childish insults at everybody to respond them, that would be most appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 I love SG posts. They really show him up to be the ageing, senile, neo-nazi we always knew he was. My fav', of course, was the Obama is a commie posts of the last election. Priceless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintfully Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 LOL, Looks like you're as ignorant about American politics as you are Climate Change. Obama's nothing but a lame duck at Copehagen...All his huffing and puffing about AGW is aimed at no one other than the Dim and Gullible, all for the consumption of peeps like you. Fortunately we have a set of robust democratic checks and balances here, put in place to prevent radicals like Obama from running wild, like the Commies did in Britain back in the 60's and 70's...... He can't do a damned thing without a 2/3 Senate majority and he's nowhere near getting that, or anything even close....Hell, he was so so far off, the whole domestic Cap and Trade bill had to be shelved until next year and that was 'Before' Climategate.... And statements like the latest one from the UN above will be like a red rag to a bull over here....I'm sure we'll be hearing plenty more at Copenhagen too....cant wait The way the bottom's fallen out of Obama's rating's, he'll be going down as the fastest lame duck President in US history.... PS ...Enjoy your "Hefty taxes and UN monitoring control"...i'm sure it will be just what you always wanted Yeah, sorry George I didn't make myself clear. The "Obamas coming to get you" comment was in quotes because it was parodic. However, the comment regarding the clock ticking was a reference to what I guess is your age... Im assuming (maybe wrongly), that you're a senile old mentalist knocking on deaths door ??? Your opinions are prehistoric anyway. Please correct me if Im wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joensuu Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 I love SG posts. They really show him up to be the ageing, senile, neo-nazi we always knew he was. My fav', of course, was the Obama is a commie posts of the last election. Priceless. I do wonder whether George actually believes half of what he types. Obama being a commie shows either a massive misunderstanding of what 'communism' is or a massive misunderstanding of the President. Unfortunately, I get the impression that StG isn't alone in his nutty disposition - perhaps logic is outlawed in Louisiana? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 BTW Folks...This is what the UN's IPCC and your tree hugging friends have in store for y'all...not that you're already more than half way there tho'...mainly thanks to the Minty's of the world Aint y'all glad that the peeps who provided all the Data and models etc for this oncoming policy have been proved to be upstanding pillars of honesty and integrety.....Oh wait! Enjoy the party....Thankfully, we on this side of the pond won't be attending...... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/6683735/Climate-change-Hefty-taxes-and-monitoring-needed-says-expert.html Climate change: 'Hefty taxes and monitoring needed', says expert The West must undergo a radical lifestyle change to prevent a global warming disaster, the world's leading climate change scientist has said. By Amy Willis Published: 8:00AM GMT 30 Nov 2009 Rajendra Pachauri, head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), says radical changes are needed to avoid a climate change disaster. Photo: EPA Rajendra Pachauri, the chairman of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), said imposing hefty taxes and increasing electrity monitoring is needed to combat the ways of adults who have been "corrupted" by their daily routines. Dr Pachauri caused controversy last year after suggesting people should eat less meat due to the levels of carbon emissions associated with rearing livestock. His latest suggestions include curbing car use, increasing London's congestion charge to £25, putting electricity monitoring equipment in hotel rooms and implementing hefty aviation taxes to stop people flying. In an interview with the Observer Dr Pachauri said: "Today we have reached the point where consumption and people's desire to consume has grown out of proportion. The reality is that our lifestyles are unsustainable. "I don't see why you couldn't have a meter in the room to register your energy consumption from air-conditioning or heating and you should be charged for that. "By bringing about changes of this kind, you could really ensure that people start becoming accountable for their actions." I don't see too much wrong with that ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minty Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 I don't see much wrong with it either. The key point is that many of us realise that sacrifices need to be made and would support such measures, whilst others want to continue their selfish, resource-intensive, and unsustainable lifestyles. So George, any chance of some answers to my original question, and Badgers ACCCE-related post? Or will you continue to ignore them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorpe-le-Saint Posted 1 December, 2009 Share Posted 1 December, 2009 LOL, Looks like you're as ignorant about American politics as you are Climate Change. Obama's nothing but a lame duck at Copehagen...All his huffing and puffing about AGW is aimed at no one other than the Dim and Gullible, all for the consumption of peeps like you. Fortunately we have a set of robust democratic checks and balances here, put in place to prevent radicals like Obama from running wild, like the Commies did in Britain back in the 60's and 70's...... He can't do a damned thing without a 2/3 Senate majority and he's nowhere near getting that, or anything even close....Hell, he was so so far off, the whole domestic Cap and Trade bill had to be shelved until next year and that was 'Before' Climategate.... And statements like the latest one from the UN above will be like a red rag to a bull over here....I'm sure we'll be hearing plenty more at Copenhagen too....cant wait The way the bottom's fallen out of Obama's rating's, he'll be going down as the fastest lame duck President in US history.... PS ...Enjoy your "Hefty taxes and UN monitoring control"...i'm sure it will be just what you always wanted Wishful thinking St.G, Obama is one of the greatest things to happen to the U.S in recent history, however, people like yourself don't want America entering the 21st century. You're stuck in your plastic-fantastic 'Commie' fearing bubble from the 1980s. The health care reform is a fantastic example! There is a new generation of people of voting age who will vote for him again in four years time. Your time is up St.G, make sure you switch all the lights off and TVs off of 'Stand-by' as you go, there's a helpful chap! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopGun Posted 1 December, 2009 Author Share Posted 1 December, 2009 http://www.newenergyfocus.com/do/ecco/view_item?listid=1&listcatid=32&listitemid=3279§ion=Wind I wonder what George makes of that bunch of rabid communists, the Conservative Party. Their energy spokesman Greg Clark said: "I've already made the point that climate change isn't just about government. But I'd also like to say that it isn't just about business either. Climate change is about all of us. And that, as well as promoting enterprise and innovation, government also needs to empower communities, families and individuals to play their part too." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 1 December, 2009 Share Posted 1 December, 2009 I wasn't aware that people like Saint George existed outside of films. I know who you're thinking of - that sensible chap in Dr Strangelove who rides an atom bomb from his B-52, yee-hawing to oblivion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint George Posted 1 December, 2009 Share Posted 1 December, 2009 Wishful thinking St.G, Obama is one of the greatest things to happen to the U.S in recent history, however, people like yourself don't want America entering the 21st century. You're stuck in your plastic-fantastic 'Commie' fearing bubble from the 1980s. The health care reform is a fantastic example! There is a new generation of people of voting age who will vote for him again in four years time. Your time is up St.G, make sure you switch all the lights off and TVs off of 'Stand-by' as you go, there's a helpful chap! LOL....posted on the 1st December 2009...'Oh the irony! The very day the 'Lisbon Treaty' takes effect and Britain meekly handed over it's Sovereignty to the EU President, without so much of a squeak!...hope you made the best use of your vote?...Oh wait!...the Irish decided on your behalf and what little control you have left of your own Country is about to be handed over to the UN in the name of AGW lol No surprise there then, from a "Nation of Bed Wetters" As for the young and Zero?......One of the fastest free falling Presidents in US history........ Lame duck within a year and One and done there after....You heard it here first Here's the 'real' polls without the last 6 months missing to try and "Hide the decline" like the ones in the link above Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joensuu Posted 1 December, 2009 Share Posted 1 December, 2009 What, no new climate 'non-science' for us today George? Or have you given up on that now? I'm not even sure what your last post is arguing, are you trying to come on a UK-based website and argue that the UK is a nation of bed wetters? Do you have any stats on nocturnal urination? I'm sure your cranky non-science friends could fabricate some for you (you might want to try these for some bed time reading: http://www.nafc.org/index.php?page=facts-statistics hmm, or even this one, perhaps you should give pi5sing yourself a try, apparently it's good for you: http://www.bottomlinesecrets.com/article.html?article_id=48838) You didn't do a very good job selecting the Rasmussen poll data (48% approval), if you'd bothered having a closer look you would have seen that FOX have come up with some that look even worst for the President (46% approval) http://www.pollingreport.com/obama_job1.htm#FOX. Hey look I can play the selecting extreme nonsense game too. Next time you want to prove a point, I'd advise you to find the most extreme data you can (second best just isn't good enough), as it's got to be more accurate than all the other ones being suppessed by the global leftist commie socialist conspiracy that exists only in your head. You really are the biggest tool I've ever had the displeasure to commune with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheaf Saint Posted 1 December, 2009 Share Posted 1 December, 2009 ST G, you really are something else. You seem to be using the fact that Britain has signed up to the Lisbon Treaty as some kind of insult against the whole population of Britain now. Please take into account that it was done by our beloved government, behind our backs, after they promised faithfully in their last election manifesto that we would be given a referendum to decide for ourselves. Now I know you can argue that we should never have believed promises made by any politicians in the first place (I didn't vote for them in case you want to know), but could you please clarify how exactly that makes us a 'nation of bed wetters' as you so eloquently put it? Short of gathering en masse, marching on whitehall and starting a revolution, I don't see what else we could have done about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopGun Posted 2 December, 2009 Author Share Posted 2 December, 2009 The forum at large has a problem with George. I think that he should be allowed to espouse his opinions but, as an individual who works in energy and environment stakeholder communications, I think it is fair to say George represents a very small element of the "vocal minority". Don't get wound up by George. It suits his unhealthy agenda. In effect, what George has here is a "letters to the editor" page where all his letters get published. I imagine he tries quite unsuccessfully to get various newspaper editors to print his rather barmy views in their papers on a regular basis but doesn't get much success and subsequent attention. What is interesting is that since George has reinvigorated himself here with his bizarre views, the more reasonable climate change neutrals/sceptics here have backed off. A case of how to win friends and influence people, if ever it has been taught! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minty Posted 2 December, 2009 Share Posted 2 December, 2009 I just want him to answer my question... the fact he won't says it all for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 2 December, 2009 Share Posted 2 December, 2009 (edited) I just want him to answer my question... the fact he won't says it all for me. It's not that he won't, more that he can't. SG has never been that bright but still, at his age, breathing is a bonus. Edited 2 December, 2009 by View From The Top Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 2 December, 2009 Share Posted 2 December, 2009 The Guardan reading "Adrian Moles" that monopolise this thread are the vocal minority. Look what's on the front page of todays Express.... http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/143573 Professor Ian Plimer condemned the climate change lobby as “climate comrades” keeping the “gravy train” going Climate Comrades - i like that and it certainly sums up the Arian Moles on here. He suggested many scientists had a vested interest in promoting climate change because it helped secure more funding for research. He said: “The climate comrades are trying to keep the gravy train going. Governments are also keen on putting their hands as deep as possible into our pockets. I can understand Top Guns attitude as he's a socialist and as such will want to leech off people to protect his own job, but it's shocking how there are some without vested interests that are so naive as to be taken in by the lies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopGun Posted 2 December, 2009 Author Share Posted 2 December, 2009 The Guardan reading "Adrian Moles" that monopolise this thread are the vocal minority. Look what's on the front page of todays Express.... http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/143573 Professor Ian Plimer condemned the climate change lobby as “climate comrades” keeping the “gravy train” going Climate Comrades - i like that and it certainly sums up the Arian Moles on here. He suggested many scientists had a vested interest in promoting climate change because it helped secure more funding for research. He said: “The climate comrades are trying to keep the gravy train going. Governments are also keen on putting their hands as deep as possible into our pockets. I can understand Top Guns attitude as he's a socialist and as such will want to leech off people to protect his own job, but it's shocking how there are some without vested interests that are so naive as to be taken in by the lies. What a ridiculous post. All of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 2 December, 2009 Share Posted 2 December, 2009 The Guardan reading "Adrian Moles" that monopolise this thread are the vocal minority. Look what's on the front page of todays Express.... http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/143573 Professor Ian Plimer condemned the climate change lobby as “climate comrades” keeping the “gravy train” going Climate Comrades - i like that and it certainly sums up the Arian Moles on here. : “The climate comrades are trying to keep the gravy train going. Governments are also keen on putting their hands as deep as possible into our pockets. I can understand Top Guns attitude as he's a socialist and as such will want to leech off people to protect his own job, but it's shocking how there are some without vested interests that are so naive as to be taken in by the lies. What is thread really does hightlight is how thick the neo-fascist right wingers are. Only the really, really dumb don't accept that pumping millions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere and basing the future on hydro carbons is foolish, regardless of mans implied impact on climate change. The thick right wingers would have been the type that oppossed a smoking ban and would have said there was no hard evidence about passive smoking, or going futher back, would have oppossed the banning of nuclear tests invloving our seviceman as the data would be inconclusive regarding cancer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheaf Saint Posted 2 December, 2009 Share Posted 2 December, 2009 The Guardan reading "Adrian Moles" that monopolise this thread are the vocal minority. Look what's on the front page of todays Express.... http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/143573 Professor Ian Plimer condemned the climate change lobby as “climate comrades” keeping the “gravy train” going Climate Comrades - i like that and it certainly sums up the Arian Moles on here. He suggested many scientists had a vested interest in promoting climate change because it helped secure more funding for research. He said: “The climate comrades are trying to keep the gravy train going. Governments are also keen on putting their hands as deep as possible into our pockets. I can understand Top Guns attitude as he's a socialist and as such will want to leech off people to protect his own job, but it's shocking how there are some without vested interests that are so naive as to be taken in by the lies. To be honest Dune, I would take what this prof says with a pinch of salt even if tha article appeared anywhere other than the Daily Express. For him to claim that every scientist who believes in MMCC has a 'vested interest' in keeping the campaign going is naive at best, and inflamatory in the extreme. What about people like James Lovelock? Is he only interested in getting further funding for research? Secondly, why do you persist in making this connection between left-wing politics and concern for the environment Dune? I asked you before but you conveniently ignored it. Do you believe that it it impossible to be concerned about our climate and future energy needs while being on the right of the political spectrum? Is environmental consciousness the sole reserve of socialists, tree-huggers and hippies? If that is what you genuinely believe then you are, I hate to say, an idiot. And thirdly, why do you feel the need to be so insulting towards people who do not share your view? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 2 December, 2009 Share Posted 2 December, 2009 What is thread really does hightlight is how thick the neo-fascist right wingers are. Only the really, really dumb don't accept that pumping millions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere and basing the future on hydro carbons is foolish, regardless of mans implied impact on climate change. The thick right wingers would have been the type that oppossed a smoking ban and would have said there was no hard evidence about passive smoking, or going futher back, would have oppossed the banning of nuclear tests invloving our seviceman as the data would be inconclusive regarding cancer. Pumping millions of tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere has little or no impact on the earths climate. As Professor Plimer said climate change was caused by natural events such as volcanic eruptions, the shifting of the Earth’s orbit and cosmic radiation. He said: “Carbon dioxide levels have been up to 1,000 times higher in the past. CO2 cannot be driving global warming now." “In the past we have had rapid and significant climate change with temperature changes greater than anything we are measuring today. They are driven by processes that have been going on since the beginning of time.” He cited periods of warming during the Roman Empire and in the Middle Ages – when Vikings grew crops on Greenland – and cooler phases such as the Dark Ages and the Little Ice Age from 1300 to 1850. I'm not disputing that we need to develop new and cost effective alternatives to fossil fuels (which are running out) and we need to do this now so as not to allow the middle east to hold the whip hand over the west, but the man made global warming lie being used to hoodwink the naive is just that - A LIE. As i've said earlier in the thread I do agree that perhaps this lie is essential because gullible footsoldiers (like yourself) are needed to make us move away from middle eastern oil, but that still doesn't make the MMGW lie anything other than a lie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 2 December, 2009 Share Posted 2 December, 2009 As i've said earlier in the thread I do agree that perhaps this lie is essential because gullible footsoldiers (like yourself) are needed to make us move away from middle eastern oil, but that still doesn't make the MMGW lie anything other than a lie. Care to point out where I state that I believe climate change is the result of man and not a natural cycle? Care to find it on any thread that has dealt with this issue? Oh, you can't, what a 'kin shock. My beliefs don't alter the fact that only an idiot, and I include you in that bracket, believes that pumping millions of tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere can be anything but a stupid idea. It should come as no surprise that two of our resident neo-nazis believe it's all a conspiracy. Prephaps it's linked to their low IQ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Landrew Posted 2 December, 2009 Share Posted 2 December, 2009 Care to point out where I state that I believe climate change is the result of man and not a natural cycle? Care to find it on any thread that has dealt with this issue? Oh, you can't, what a 'kin shock. My beliefs don't alter the fact that only an idiot, and I include you in that bracket, believes that pumping millions of tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere can be anything but a stupid idea. It should come as no surprise that two of our resident neo-nazis believe it's all a conspiracy. Prephaps it's linked to their low IQ? OK, VFTT, much as I might support your sentiments, let's try to keep it civil, eh..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minty Posted 2 December, 2009 Share Posted 2 December, 2009 OK, VFTT, much as I might support your sentiments, let's try to keep it civil, eh..? Fair enough, but it would be nice if our views were respected, instead of being called 'Adrian Moles', 'loonie lefties' etc, which, whilst not directly deregatory, are clearly intended as a put down to those who dare differ from the name-callers point of view. Which is why I'd like to echo Bexy's last point... why do Dune and St G feel the need to belittle others' points of view all the time? Everyone on this thread who supports the belief that Climate Change has been influenced by man, accepts that we can never know for certain, and is willing to debate, whilst these two seem unable to debate and only want to shout us down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minty Posted 2 December, 2009 Share Posted 2 December, 2009 As i've said earlier in the thread I do agree that perhaps this lie is essential because gullible footsoldiers (like yourself) are needed to make us move away from middle eastern oil, but that still doesn't make the MMGW lie anything other than a lie. As I said above, and have said several times, I accept that I (nor anyone else) can never know for certain the human influence on the change in climate, but whilst my personal opinion is obviously evident on this thread, how can you be so arrogantly certain that yours is correct and that it is a 'lie'? Does the 'Precautionary principle' mean anything to you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 2 December, 2009 Share Posted 2 December, 2009 (edited) Pumping millions of tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere has little or no impact on the earths climate. As Professor Plimer said climate change was caused by natural events such as volcanic eruptions, the shifting of the Earth’s orbit and cosmic radiation. He said: “Carbon dioxide levels have been up to 1,000 times higher in the past. CO2 cannot be driving global warming now." “In the past we have had rapid and significant climate change with temperature changes greater than anything we are measuring today. They are driven by processes that have been going on since the beginning of time.” He cited periods of warming during the Roman Empire and in the Middle Ages – when Vikings grew crops on Greenland – and cooler phases such as the Dark Ages and the Little Ice Age from 1300 to 1850. I'm not disputing that we need to develop new and cost effective alternatives to fossil fuels (which are running out) and we need to do this now so as not to allow the middle east to hold the whip hand over the west, but the man made global warming lie being used to hoodwink the naive is just that - A LIE. As i've said earlier in the thread I do agree that perhaps this lie is essential because gullible footsoldiers (like yourself) are needed to make us move away from middle eastern oil, but that still doesn't make the MMGW lie anything other than a lie. Once again you completely MISS THE POINT about MMGW/AGW. Nobody, I repeat, NOBODY (!!!!!!!), disuptes the points you have highlighted, so that's hardly proved his argument, has it ? As has been stated so many times already, the issue is not solely about CO2, or even the other greenhouse gases, it's the combination of pumping out such products into the atmosphere at the same time as we are destroying the natural routes for CO2 to be absorbed, the rain forests and the marine algal blooms. It's the totality of mankind's abuse of the planet that affects the climate, unless, of course, you can PROVE otherwise,- and that's your problem, you can't ! Also, you might want to read these, http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cif-green/2009/sep/14/climate-change-denial http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/denialist-ark-a-wobbly-craft/story-e6frg6xo-1225710263980 http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2009/sep/23/spectator-plimer-climate-change-sceptic Oh. and since when were the Conservative Party 'loony lefties' ? May I refer you back to the "Maggie Thatcher question", posted earlier, I presume you're a fan. Edited 2 December, 2009 by badgerx16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Landrew Posted 2 December, 2009 Share Posted 2 December, 2009 Fair enough, but it would be nice if our views were respected, instead of being called 'Adrian Moles', 'loonie lefties' etc, which, whilst not directly deregatory, are clearly intended as a put down to those who dare differ from the name-callers point of view. Which is why I'd like to echo Bexy's last point... why do Dune and St G feel the need to belittle others' points of view all the time? Everyone on this thread who supports the belief that Climate Change has been influenced by man, accepts that we can never know for certain, and is willing to debate, whilst these two seem unable to debate and only want to shout us down. In which case Minty, it is you, and those of you who are open minded enough to know, that you can never be absolutely certain, that have won the debate, in mine and most people's eyes. Those with closed minds are entirely in the minority, and only a fool would say that the emissions caused by the world that industrial and all consuming mankind has brought about has not made the slightest measureable difference, over a truly natural cycle, as I believe these people are saying. There are 6.4 billion of us now. We're not merely the fly in the soup anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 3 December, 2009 Share Posted 3 December, 2009 I presume this will be viewed as a whitewash in some quarters ? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8393449.stm Interesting that the Saudi delegate is sceptical, who would have thought that ? Also, for St G's benefit, here is a list of data sets and other international resources related to the analysis of the relationship between human emissions and climate change; http://gcmd.nasa.gov/KeywordSearch/Keywords.do?Portal=GCMD&KeywordPath=Parameters|HUMAN+DIMENSIONS|ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACTS|FOSSIL+FUEL+BURNING&MetadataType=0&lbnode=mdlb1 All of these MUST be part of the 'con'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 3 December, 2009 Share Posted 3 December, 2009 I'm always shocked how people get so concerned about climate change. Personally, I don't care. It obviously makes sense to try and be sustainable and to reuse things if you can. That's just sensible resource allocation but I'm not motivated by any desire to save future generations. It's like red nose day or children in need. It's nice to try to make yourself feel better and some small good may come of it but no one actually gives a **** long-term. No systemic change will occur. No capping will drive down carbon emissions. No meddling with individual's lives will stop widescale industrial emmissions. New technologies will have an impact; if the political will exists to provide the necessary wombs for their embryos. That will will exist one day. It might be too late by then. The whole thing might not be an issue at all. Either way, you can't do anything about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopGun Posted 3 December, 2009 Author Share Posted 3 December, 2009 I'm always shocked how people get so concerned about climate change. Personally, I don't care. It obviously makes sense to try and be sustainable and to reuse things if you can. That's just sensible resource allocation but I'm not motivated by any desire to save future generations. It's like red nose day or children in need. It's nice to try to make yourself feel better and some small good may come of it but no one actually gives a **** long-term. No systemic change will occur. No capping will drive down carbon emissions. No meddling with individual's lives will stop widescale industrial emmissions. New technologies will have an impact; if the political will exists to provide the necessary wombs for their embryos. That will will exist one day. It might be too late by then. The whole thing might not be an issue at all. Either way, you can't do anything about it. To an extent I agree with Benjii. You don't have to be a climate change zealot to realise that fossil fuels are limited and the UK shouldn't need to rely on imports. Viable green energy makes sense just because of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minty Posted 4 December, 2009 Share Posted 4 December, 2009 I'm always shocked how people get so concerned about climate change. Personally, I don't care. It obviously makes sense to try and be sustainable and to reuse things if you can. That's just sensible resource allocation but I'm not motivated by any desire to save future generations. It's like red nose day or children in need. It's nice to try to make yourself feel better and some small good may come of it but no one actually gives a **** long-term. No systemic change will occur. No capping will drive down carbon emissions. No meddling with individual's lives will stop widescale industrial emmissions. New technologies will have an impact; if the political will exists to provide the necessary wombs for their embryos. That will will exist one day. It might be too late by then. The whole thing might not be an issue at all. Either way, you can't do anything about it. Thanks for your honest thoughts benjii. I'm interested in finding out more about your point of view because there are a large amount of people with similar views. I honestly don't know how the motivation to save future generations comes about in any one individual. I guess it comes down to selfishness. I don't mean that in a critical way, because human's are naturally selfish, and as Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs shows, our first natural instinct is for our own personal survival, and other considerations come later. Someone once said to me that if you have kids, it comes naturally, but I don't have kids, and I *do* believe it is important to do... although that is partly because I probably will have kids one day and personally feel it is selfish to use the planet as I see fit now, to the detriment of their future. That's my personal belief and if I'm being completely honest I do struggle to understand how people can have no thoughts for the future, when it involves their children or other people that they supposedly care about. If my Grandparents or Great Grandparents acted in such a way, I might not even exist... I have to take issue with the statenent that 'no one actually gives a **** long-term'... I think the Wave demonstration in London tomorrow will demonstrate otherwise, amongst many other things. Plenty of people care, but not everyone either knows what to do about it, or feels able to do anything about it, partly because of the way things are communicated from governments or other organisations. But make no mistake, with the likes of Transition town movements, Greening campaigns, Friends of the Earth, and a host of people in other organisations, there are plenty who do care. I'm genuinely interested to know why you think no change is possible or likely. You may well be right, and I certainly agree that political will is required, and that it seems that agreement and action are currently a long way off because of the posturing and arguing, but I think to write it off completely is wrong. Local initiatives are proving far more productive and have made demonstrable differences in some areas. Global intitiatives are needed, but we drive the supply and demand for those global industries, so we can make a difference, if we want to. Again, I agree that new technologies have a major part to play, but in actual fact a lot of it comes back to your first line which you agree with, that it is down to sensible resource usage in the first place. One thing that does annoy me is that many people, and media outlets, and others, portray Climate Change as the main issue, but it is linked so closely with resource depletion, food security, biodiversity and population that it is impossible IMO to seperate the issues. That, understandably, is where many people think 'this is too big for me' and back away, which I completely understand. You might be right, and there may be nothing we can do, but it is down to everyone's personal conscience to decide what they should do. Hope you don't mind answering those points, I am genuinely interested in finding out why people hold these opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 4 December, 2009 Share Posted 4 December, 2009 New technologies will have an impact; if the political will exists to provide the necessary wombs for their embryos. That will will exist one day. It might be too late by then. The whole thing might not be an issue at all. Either way, you can't do anything about it. New technologies can and surely will make a substantial difference, as you say Benjii - but then I don't understand your conclusion - that nothing can be done. It seems to me that your conclusion is the flip side of the argument that something as vast as the planet couldn't possibly be affected by the behaviour of people. As I've said before, I wish that was true. But where is the evidence? Johann Hari takes a similar line in The Independent today. This bit is pretty telling: "A study for the journal Science randomly sampled 928 published peer-reviewed scientific papers that used the words "climate change". It found that 100 per cent – every single one – agreed it is being fuelled by human activity. There is no debate among climate scientists. There are a few scientists who don't conduct research into the climate who disagree, but going to them to find out how global warming works is a bit like going to a chiropodist and asking her to look at your ears." http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-how-i-wish-that-the-global-warming-deniers-were-right-1833728.html Now you could go along St George's and Dune's view that science is a global Masonic-like cult that is trying to deceive us all to its own unstated ends. You have to admit, a global conspiracy of those evil-doing clever clogs makes a great deal of sense (in a parallel universe somewhere). Or you could accept that, on the balance of probabilities, it's more likely than not, regrettably, that we have a bit of a problem. As someone who really wants the science to be wrong, there's another problem with the deniers' argument. and that, quite simply, is how intellectually feeble they are, as St George has so clearly demonstrated (I'm not sure that was his intention - but if ever I want to ignominiously lose an argument, I know who to PM!) And usually - to make matters far worse - it seems that all of the noisiest deniers among the scientific community and among politicians are recipients of large wads of cash from the oil industry. As for whether it matters to our generation, who knows? The five great rivers of Asia, including the Yangtze and the Ganges are fed by Himalayan glaciers that are fast disappearing. The knock-on effects of any disruption in those river systems will be global, immediate and catastrophic. Better to do what we can. But even on a selfish level, there's a really persuasive reason to act. Green technologies that cut energy use and develop renewable resources, in the end, cut costs - to all of us. The green energy business sector hasn't emerged out of money-down-the-drain altruism. It exists on a large and growing scale because there are huge rewards in it. Using less energy, or greener energy creates a virtuous circle. Burning oil - and genuflecting before the waning might of the global oil industry - does not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joensuu Posted 4 December, 2009 Share Posted 4 December, 2009 I'm always shocked how people get so concerned about climate change. Personally, I don't care. It obviously makes sense to try and be sustainable and to reuse things if you can. That's just sensible resource allocation but I'm not motivated by any desire to save future generations. It's like red nose day or children in need. It's nice to try to make yourself feel better and some small good may come of it but no one actually gives a **** long-term. No systemic change will occur. No capping will drive down carbon emissions. No meddling with individual's lives will stop widescale industrial emmissions. New technologies will have an impact; if the political will exists to provide the necessary wombs for their embryos. That will will exist one day. It might be too late by then. The whole thing might not be an issue at all. Either way, you can't do anything about it. Sadly, Benji, I feel you share the majority view. I respect your opinion, because I have heard similar views expressed by many of my mates. While it's treated by the public in a similar way as Red Nose day or Children in Need, it really shouldn't be. Millions of starving children is absolutely disgraceful, and a damning incitement of capitalism in work. However, millions of starving children won't actually threaten the existence of our species, nor the planet as a whole. Climate change needs to be the top item on every country's political agenda. It will soon be the top item, when its effects become more pronounced, when water, food and fuel shortages force our governments to react, unfortunately by then it will be too late. The order of priority should be: Climate Poverty/Welfare/Health Education ...followed at a significant distance by Law & Order/Military It really angers me when people donate money to animal charities when there are far, FAR, more pressing issues to tackle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintfully Posted 4 December, 2009 Share Posted 4 December, 2009 I'm always shocked how people get so concerned about climate change. Personally, I don't care. It obviously makes sense to try and be sustainable and to reuse things if you can. That's just sensible resource allocation but I'm not motivated by any desire to save future generations. It's like red nose day or children in need. It's nice to try to make yourself feel better and some small good may come of it but no one actually gives a **** long-term. No systemic change will occur. No capping will drive down carbon emissions. No meddling with individual's lives will stop widescale industrial emmissions. New technologies will have an impact; if the political will exists to provide the necessary wombs for their embryos. That will will exist one day. It might be too late by then. The whole thing might not be an issue at all. Either way, you can't do anything about it. I think this says more about you than about climate change. The idea that you/we can't do anything is illogical, and ignores history and human development. I'm not sure which of the thousands of examples to provide, but heres a few where humans have made a difference - on an enormous scale: i) political change - abolition of slavery ii) social change - the vote for women iii) social change part2 - broad acceptance of homosexuality in the UK. (do you remember what it was like as recently as the 80's?) iii) climate change - local climate change generated as a result of massive deforestation around the Nile - ie. desertification iv) prevention of up to a third of cancers by a proven link to smoking v) the enormous change in the fortune of Saints by the purchase of the club by Marcus Leibherr. vi) the defeat of Hitler etc. etc. My point is that these changes were bought about by man - often individuals. So when you say you don't care, cause you can't do anthing about it, I think you're being hugely pessimistic about your ability and the ability of others to do something. My advice would be to get off your arse and make a difference. As to future generations - well it is cool to be a nihilist, but a bit immature. Please don't say you don't care/count, because your often eloquent writing suggests you are far to smart to really believe it. All IMHO. iv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Bates Posted 4 December, 2009 Share Posted 4 December, 2009 http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/features/2757558/Tide-of-filth-the-dirtiest-river.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 4 December, 2009 Share Posted 4 December, 2009 I'm always shocked how people get so concerned about climate change. Personally, I don't care. It obviously makes sense to try and be sustainable and to reuse things if you can. That's just sensible resource allocation but I'm not motivated by any desire to save future generations. It's like red nose day or children in need. It's nice to try to make yourself feel better and some small good may come of it but no one actually gives a **** long-term. No systemic change will occur. No capping will drive down carbon emissions. No meddling with individual's lives will stop widescale industrial emmissions. New technologies will have an impact; if the political will exists to provide the necessary wombs for their embryos. That will will exist one day. It might be too late by then. The whole thing might not be an issue at all. Either way, you can't do anything about it. In a way I agree with you, if what the scientists say is happening is right then global warming will happen regardless of what we do about it, the feedback processes are already in place. What is the point in me recycling a Marmite jar when the government - for all their spin on the environment - plough ahead with building extra runways at Heathrow? And what our government is doing is a **** in the ocean compared to what China and India are doing. All governments care about is appeasing the masses, if they appear to be doing something they will get voted in - that is their only motivation. All this capping/carbon trading/ targets is just a load of nonsense. The world's governments will only get serious once the warming does - and then it will be too late. Luckily for us we shouldn't be too badly effected, our climate is pretty mild - if it gets a bit warmer we will be OK, if weather gets more severe we will be OK too. It's the millions worldwide who rely on their specific climate for their survival that are/will get hit the worst. Forget trying to combat it, just concentrate on adapting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintfully Posted 4 December, 2009 Share Posted 4 December, 2009 http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/features/2757558/Tide-of-filth-the-dirtiest-river.html Joan Rivers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintfully Posted 4 December, 2009 Share Posted 4 December, 2009 In a way I agree with you, if what the scientists say is happening is right then global warming will happen regardless of what we do about it, the feedback processes are already in place. What is the point in me recycling a Marmite jar when the government - for all their spin on the environment - plough ahead with building extra runways at Heathrow? And what our government is doing is a **** in the ocean compared to what China and India are doing. All governments care about is appeasing the masses, if they appear to be doing something they will get voted in - that is their only motivation. All this capping/carbon trading/ targets is just a load of nonsense. The world's governments will only get serious once the warming does - and then it will be too late. Luckily for us we shouldn't be too badly effected, our climate is pretty mild - if it gets a bit warmer we will be OK, if weather gets more severe we will be OK too. It's the millions worldwide who rely on their specific climate for their survival that are/will get hit the worst. Forget trying to combat it, just concentrate on adapting. i) If global warming is happening (it looks as though it almost certainly is, so I think its a big risk to hope otherwise), the difference between a 2 degree and a 6 degree increase in global temp would be huge - so it makes sense to try and reduce the damage by lowering emmissions. ii) There is absolutely no point in you recycling a marmite jar if no-one else does. However, Im not a selfish ****, and you don't seem to be either, so on that basis I assume there are millions/billions of others who arn't c*nts too, and will probably do a bit of recycling. I want to be in that number and not one of the c*nts. iii) Governments certainly won't do anything if we keep voting the w*nkers back in again - the only option is to make them have a real stake in keeping voters onside, and that means voting the political establishment out. I'm going to Vote for a hung parliament and subsequent electoral reform so we can have a system that actually represents the views of more than the 10% in the middle who can't make up their minds between Lab and Con (which is basically the same thing now anyway). iv) If global warming is real, the UK will be affected because we import most of our food, and although we are a rich country, we're not that rich - 20% of our GDP comes from banking and we have just seen how fragile that source of wealth actually is (I wish we still made stuff). v) Why don't we concentrate on lowering emmissions as well as adapting to the potential consequences of climate change. Its not that hard to do your bit and vote in a positive way? And it makes our brief lives a lot more interesting if we try and change the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint George Posted 4 December, 2009 Share Posted 4 December, 2009 This guy says all that needs to be said......Most of the World is waking up to the scam, except for here, where most peeps are still in denial it seems.......http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgIEQqLokL8&feature=player_embedded Just remember folks....The opposite to Skeptic is Gullible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 4 December, 2009 Share Posted 4 December, 2009 This guy says all that needs to be said......Most of the World is waking up to the scam, except for here, where most peeps are still in denial it seems.......http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgIEQqLokL8&feature=player_embedded Just remember folks....The opposite to Skeptic is Gullible This guy, Rex Murphy, is so laughable that even his own TV station in Canada takes the **** out of him! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now