Eagle Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 What always confused me with all this evidence from the year dot is how did they measure temperature before we had degrees C & Fs and thermometers and did they write the results on cave walls? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 What always confused me with all this evidence from the year dot is how did they measure temperature before we had degrees C & Fs and thermometers and did they write the results on cave walls? Michael McIntyre (Funny bloke) does a sketch about "since records began" and the bit about them starting to make records on the hottest, coldest, wettest and dryest day on record was a classic!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
21GoodLife Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 I see you have bought into the whole thing then 21GoodLife. Do you also have insurance cover against alien landings, meteorites and earthquakes? .......and it isn't climate change insurance; it is climate change tax that the government want to stiff us with. When there are scientists from the "the world is heating up camp" swapping emails stating that they can't justify half of the nonsense they are spouting, what are the rest of us to think? These are the very people who are telling government and then government is acting on their advice! Not sure who's bought in more than the other, me on the science or you on the media. I know which one I generally trust more, but neither are perfect, but one is faaaaar worse than the other. Nothing like a good conspiracy and the tabloids to stir up a hornet's nest to put everything out of context. Fact is there's strong science, regardless of a few rogue mails that have been blown out of proportion and tarnished the science. Surely you understand I didn't mean personal insurance, but global insurance. The world has spent billions if not trillions on disaster mitigation with earthquakes, and yes, even meteorites. Not sure about aliens though, but it wouldn't surprise me if there's been money spent on it by the US/UK military, as well as search for ET by various scientific sections. You keep believing your tax story though. But ask yourself why didn't they introduce green tax back in the 70s when global warming came to light? What always confused me with all this evidence from the year dot is how did they measure temperature before we had degrees C & Fs and thermometers and did they write the results on cave walls? Records only go back to the mid 1700s and then they were a bit sketchy until 1800s. Temperatures previous to this were worked out by clever scientist bods using fossils and pollen from earth cores. In the case of plant life, they only survive or thrive in certain temperature ranges, therefore the concentration, existence or non-existence of pollen from particular species gives a range of temperatures at a given time. Time can be loosely calculated using several techniques. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
21GoodLife Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 What always confused me with all this evidence from the year dot is how did they measure temperature before we had degrees C & Fs and thermometers and did they write the results on cave walls? Michael McIntyre (Funny bloke) does a sketch about "since records began" and the bit about them starting to make records on the hottest, coldest, wettest and dryest day on record was a classic!! And Michael McIntyre is brilliant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 It's good to know 21, that you'll be making the appropriate sacrifices for the rest of us! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
21GoodLife Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 It's good to know 21, that you'll be making the appropriate sacrifices for the rest of us! It's OK I can afford the tax with plenty of headroom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Oh, thought you'd dug your garden up - for food production; perhaps you need to change your name?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
21GoodLife Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Oh, thought you'd dug your garden up - for food production; perhaps you need to change your name?! Nah, Kingsway Allotment. The green and cost benefits are secondary though, the missus just likes gardening, and I like eating...a lot . Anyway, recent study (It was either National Geographic or New Scientist I read it in) shows that the price of green in the US would cost overall 5%. They indicated that the UK would be marginally better. If those figures are correct, is that too much? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Too much for most folk I'm afraid - most like their lifestyles the way they are! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
21GoodLife Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Too much for most folk I'm afraid - most like their lifestyles the way they are! Well, hence the tax. No choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 I believe Bono & Geldof are writing a suitable song, "Cool The World" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 most like their lifestyles the way they are And you will not be around to suffer the Consequences so why bother, let the next generation pay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Posted December 10, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 It might help the debate if you could give your take on the ?consequences? for our grandchildren. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted December 10, 2009 Report Share Posted December 10, 2009 Selfish I know Kyje; but that's the bottom line; shared by a large section of the population, who all have a vote! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted December 13, 2009 Report Share Posted December 13, 2009 Obs While I disagree with you, in that we should be doing something I do admire your honesty perhaps it would be better if more people were as honest and not hide behind the few remaining scientists that are skeptical Bill I am sure you know the consequences, here are a few loss of land, lack of water loss of animal life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted December 13, 2009 Report Share Posted December 13, 2009 I niether dismiss or accept the science, as not all scientists agree - what I do believe is this: there is an historical record of extreme climate variation. Whether this latest one is caused by mankind, which is arguably an arrogant assumption; doesn't really matter, cos the changes are occuring and it is even more arrogant of man to claim they can be halted now. What we should be doing, rather than this futile illusion of preventing change; is ADAPT to them. If the sea level is rising: build at higher elevations. If we get more rain: collect it and utilise it. If the resources of the world diminish: reduce demand by limiting population growth etc etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davy51 Posted December 13, 2009 Report Share Posted December 13, 2009 Well said Obs.It is ironic that a country that is liable to floods can be crying drought several weeks later simply because the political will is not there to capture this water & utilise its potential for power or just to provide adequate water supply...we are blessed with a great natural resouce that is wasted.What vulnerable areas need are proper sturdy water defences which can contain floods & store some or all of the water for future shortages,any surplus could be run off through sluices when the rain abates.We also need to stop building on land liable to be at risk of flooding . What better way to reduce our carbon footprint than harness what we have already,but it seems our self serving government is more than happy just to clobber the electorate with so called green taxes while at the same time refusing to implement a green policy ,choosing instead to pour the money into an expanding financial black hole of its own making. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
21GoodLife Posted December 13, 2009 Report Share Posted December 13, 2009 Tell that to the Maldives and other endangered islands. Tell that to the 40% of the population of this earth who suffer from water poverty. Tell that to the countless species that are being eradicated every month due to anthropogenic activity. Tell that to the hungry. Personally I'll be made up if the science is incorrect and we have nothing to do with climate change, and this was all a storm in a teacup. Problem is, what happens if it's right? Clobbered with Green taxes? I was under the impression that it's 5%. Hardly clobbered. And, harnessing what we have already costs money, where's it going to come from? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted December 14, 2009 Report Share Posted December 14, 2009 Maldives - islands come and go: Species - come and go, or at least those that don't ADAPT to change. Food and water - if the number of consumers exceeds the capacity of their enviroment to sustain them, they starve - natures way of promoting birth control. As for who pays, for the preparations required to ADAPT to change; the same folk who are being conned with green taxes - us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
21GoodLife Posted December 14, 2009 Report Share Posted December 14, 2009 How unsympathetic and ignorant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LymmParent Posted December 14, 2009 Report Share Posted December 14, 2009 I like the bit where our Western role in hoovering up all the crops grown in the third world to fuel the obesity epidemic and support our habit of wasting a third of everything is artfully turned into Mother Nature's masterplan.... but that's Obs, for you, 21. A real artist! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted December 14, 2009 Report Share Posted December 14, 2009 The Maldives are a case in point. Far from sinking beneath the waves these coral islands are actually rising. A scientist who has made it his work for the last 25 years has shown this to be true. However the political leaders of those islands find that they can more readily squeeze conscience money out of the rich (?) western nations by claiming the opposite. Now there's an inconvenient truth for you! Another one is the Met Office claim of rising temperatures. Most of the temperatures recorded by meteorological services come from weather stations sited in urban areas and, most notably, at airports. These stations are prone to "Urban Heat Island" effect where they show increases in temperature in line with increases in urbanisation. A growth of tarmac and concrete as well as air conditioners, traffic and Jumbo jets all add to the perceived temperature rise. It's no wonder the "scientists" at the university of East Anglia were embarrased when they were found to be hiding such eveidence of the fraud that's going on. The number of sceptical scientists is not, as is widely announced by the media, a minority. rather they are in the majority but aren't paid big money by big government to have their opinions aired. They aren't being paid by the oil companies either The truth is out there if you only open your eyes and look for it. I'm briefly back in the world of mobile phone signal by the way Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
21GoodLife Posted December 14, 2009 Report Share Posted December 14, 2009 And I suppose some corrupt government official in Venice has left the bath tap open on purpose? And I also suppose that the majority of the warming in question, happening in the more extreme latitudes, is affected by heat islands? Urban areas have little to do with the rise in GMST. In fact, the band that the majority of the world lives in has changed little compared to the north and south polar regions. However, keep believing everything you read in the papers, as I suppose their only purpose is to report the "Truth" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle Posted December 14, 2009 Report Share Posted December 14, 2009 However, keep believing everything you read in the papers, as I suppose their only purpose is to report the "Truth" But would it be true if the press only reported your particular views. Is it a case of "my experts are more expert that your experts" or is it just bloody minded "I am me so I must be right"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
21GoodLife Posted December 14, 2009 Report Share Posted December 14, 2009 But would it be true if the press only reported your particular views. Is it a case of "my experts are more expert that your experts" or is it just bloody minded "I am me so I must be right"? No, it's entirely not about views, mine or anybody else's. It's about what sells papers. Scandal sells papers, especially fundamentally blown out of proportion ones. Truth is irrelevant, although it is made out to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.