Just Had A Run In With A Lecky Scooter...
Society & Culture0 min ago
For attention of those climate change numpties
For the attention of those braindead types who pipe up about the "global warming lot" going quiet when there's 2 days of snow and adopting the head in the sand approach:
http://www.newscienti...n-climate-change.html
Lets see what counter arguments they come up with.,
http://www.newscienti...n-climate-change.html
Lets see what counter arguments they come up with.,
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Avatar. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
//What is this mythical "climate change science" money?//
It is tax payer money to fund places like the Hadley Centre (part of the Met Office) which costs us about £20million a year. £20 million keeps a lot of scientist in work, I expect if you were to ask them are you wasting our money, they would say 'no' aswell.
http://en.wikipedia.o...ediction_and_Research
It is tax payer money to fund places like the Hadley Centre (part of the Met Office) which costs us about £20million a year. £20 million keeps a lot of scientist in work, I expect if you were to ask them are you wasting our money, they would say 'no' aswell.
http://en.wikipedia.o...ediction_and_Research
There's a difference between 'climate' and 'weather'.
Climate is longer term and based on averages. Averages are rather good at helping people understand a trend.
Of course, when you're knee-deep in the rare and elusive 'snow alligator', it's difficult to remember that the original objective was the drain the swamp.
Climate is longer term and based on averages. Averages are rather good at helping people understand a trend.
Of course, when you're knee-deep in the rare and elusive 'snow alligator', it's difficult to remember that the original objective was the drain the swamp.
This is my, simplistic, view. The world has heated up and cooled down several times since its creation. Even if we are making a difference this time, the experts say four percent is the maximum difference we can make, if the planet is going to get too warm for us, there is nothing we can do, or not do, to stop it... and taxing everything is not going to make a difference!!
Define Earth Scientist.
This cold weather doesn't prove anything one way or another.
However not one of your 3,146 scientist can prove thier theory and i'm sorry but one abstract article, which is very small on fact, isn't going to change my mind.
Science works on fact, it is the media that twist this and makes theory fact.
As for money lets see nearly every government in the world is contributing huge amounts to research in learned establishments. Private companies are building wind turbines and solar panels. Other companies are making huge investments in Sea Turbines and these are just a few I know of.
In the meantime I was told by the Met Office that it would snow on my house from 10pm Saturday until Monday morning with tempratures at a max of -2, I made my plans accordingly. It snowed for an hour and a half at 9pm Sunday, when I got up Monday I didn't even have to defrost the car. Meterologists are scientists who don't know everything.
This cold weather doesn't prove anything one way or another.
However not one of your 3,146 scientist can prove thier theory and i'm sorry but one abstract article, which is very small on fact, isn't going to change my mind.
Science works on fact, it is the media that twist this and makes theory fact.
As for money lets see nearly every government in the world is contributing huge amounts to research in learned establishments. Private companies are building wind turbines and solar panels. Other companies are making huge investments in Sea Turbines and these are just a few I know of.
In the meantime I was told by the Met Office that it would snow on my house from 10pm Saturday until Monday morning with tempratures at a max of -2, I made my plans accordingly. It snowed for an hour and a half at 9pm Sunday, when I got up Monday I didn't even have to defrost the car. Meterologists are scientists who don't know everything.
Its the global warming lot who have their head in the sand. Just pop along to the Natural history museum and look at the bar showing temperature deviation. It happens the planet is not stable, get used to it.
And, even assuming you are right do you really thing you are going to make that much difference? Is it not possible it is combined issue. In which case should we not be building our defences, stop building on low land and flood plains etc.
And, even assuming you are right do you really thing you are going to make that much difference? Is it not possible it is combined issue. In which case should we not be building our defences, stop building on low land and flood plains etc.
/// Private companies are building wind turbines and solar panels. Other companies are making huge investments in Sea Turbines and these are just a few I know of.///
Exactly these companies tend to make millions, because of this theory.
Take the pharmaceutical industry, how much have they made over the Swine Flu pandemic, that doesn't seem to have materialised?
Exactly these companies tend to make millions, because of this theory.
Take the pharmaceutical industry, how much have they made over the Swine Flu pandemic, that doesn't seem to have materialised?
-- answer removed --
Bakers have little option but to bake bread and cakes, if they are to remain in their profession; so they have an incentive to point out bread is good for you. Which in moderation it is, so they'd be being honest anyway.
But there is plenty of science to be done in numerous areas, so there is much less incentive for the whole of the scientific community to claim belief in something they knew wasn't so. If investigation in one area ends, something somewhere else starts to be funded.
One can expect the occasional rare individual to be tempted to exaggerate their results, in order to continue funding, but not the whole scientific community (with the exception of a few dissenters).
And the idea that they are all out to pull the wool over everyone's eyes is against the very principles of scientific method. To try to fool the world, even if such a thing was achievable, would effectively be professional suicide. And it would need extraordinary planning to get everyone on board and stay silent about the conspiracy. The very idea is ludicrous.
The problem is that the data shows a steep temperature increase coinciding with the growth of industry; a trend sufficiently different from past trends that we are obliged to look for a different cause. True, climate is not perfectly stable over time, but one doesn't forecast such drastic change within a few centuries from considering the evidence of previous change. So if it isn't human activity tipping the balance, then one has to find a better solution; and one hasn't been suggested yet.
The fact that some folk seize this as an opportunity to make money, doesn't change the data.
But there is plenty of science to be done in numerous areas, so there is much less incentive for the whole of the scientific community to claim belief in something they knew wasn't so. If investigation in one area ends, something somewhere else starts to be funded.
One can expect the occasional rare individual to be tempted to exaggerate their results, in order to continue funding, but not the whole scientific community (with the exception of a few dissenters).
And the idea that they are all out to pull the wool over everyone's eyes is against the very principles of scientific method. To try to fool the world, even if such a thing was achievable, would effectively be professional suicide. And it would need extraordinary planning to get everyone on board and stay silent about the conspiracy. The very idea is ludicrous.
The problem is that the data shows a steep temperature increase coinciding with the growth of industry; a trend sufficiently different from past trends that we are obliged to look for a different cause. True, climate is not perfectly stable over time, but one doesn't forecast such drastic change within a few centuries from considering the evidence of previous change. So if it isn't human activity tipping the balance, then one has to find a better solution; and one hasn't been suggested yet.
The fact that some folk seize this as an opportunity to make money, doesn't change the data.
How they can preach to us about reducing our carbon footprints and reduce our car usage etc then allow football clubs to put big plastic domes over the pitch and run space heaters 24hrs a day to stop a bloody football match being postponed is beyond me! All they need to do is go to an average town pub and ask 10 men their opinion on how the england team should be run and there would be enough hot air to heat the pitch for a month!
That is a good point. There is very little logic, except maybe to say that there is a lot of people and only a few heated football pitches, so their overall affect is less.
IMO most of what we are being asked to do is tokenism suggested by politicians and committees. I can understand wanting to set an example and feeling one is being responsible, but it is my opinion that we are unlikely achieve the necessary lifestyle changes even if we all did endured what we can.
My suspicion is that there is so many people on this planet that we'd all have to live like medieval peasants to achieve our aim. Either we get breakthroughs allowing us to obtain power without the present environmental costs, or we end up having to deal with the result of climate change, whatever the cost.
IMO most of what we are being asked to do is tokenism suggested by politicians and committees. I can understand wanting to set an example and feeling one is being responsible, but it is my opinion that we are unlikely achieve the necessary lifestyle changes even if we all did endured what we can.
My suspicion is that there is so many people on this planet that we'd all have to live like medieval peasants to achieve our aim. Either we get breakthroughs allowing us to obtain power without the present environmental costs, or we end up having to deal with the result of climate change, whatever the cost.
Avatar
I am convinced that man made climate change is occurring.
But for you to present a survey of scientists as evidence that climate change is real is total nonsense, unscientific and naive.
The Hadley Centre is
//...one of the world’s leading centres for climate change research, our scientists make significant contributions to peer-reviewed literature and to a variety of climate change reports, including the Assessment Report of the IPCC. Our climate projections were the basis for the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change.//
It employs 200 scientists at the taxpayers expense.
I am convinced that man made climate change is occurring.
But for you to present a survey of scientists as evidence that climate change is real is total nonsense, unscientific and naive.
The Hadley Centre is
//...one of the world’s leading centres for climate change research, our scientists make significant contributions to peer-reviewed literature and to a variety of climate change reports, including the Assessment Report of the IPCC. Our climate projections were the basis for the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change.//
It employs 200 scientists at the taxpayers expense.
Climate change scientists are perpetuating a myth to make money out of it/
Right!!
I suppose you think Firemen are arsonists because of all the public money we waste on firetrucks!!
Perhaps it's the police that do all the burglaries?
I work in the computer security business I still find the odd nutter who thinks we write the viruses
Stands to reason - doesn't it?
Right!!
I suppose you think Firemen are arsonists because of all the public money we waste on firetrucks!!
Perhaps it's the police that do all the burglaries?
I work in the computer security business I still find the odd nutter who thinks we write the viruses
Stands to reason - doesn't it?
I'm on your side, honest, but just playing Devil's Advocate, the News Scientist report was based on 3146 scientists. It is easy to get 31,000 scientist to say the exact opposite...
http://www.telegraph....e-global-warming.html
http://www.telegraph....e-global-warming.html
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
Quizzes & Puzzles3 mins ago
ChatterBank5 mins ago
Animals & Nature5 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.