FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[Stephen]

We should agree to disagree, however, just keep a balanced view.

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html - 0.28% of CO2 man-made, and falling temperatures. Oh dear, more inconvenient truths...

Fine by me. All I am saying is that some of us are merely trying to protect the world from the robber barons (Who are people completely dissimilar to yourself)

It's a matter of that old saying, "be careful not to mess with the balance of things". Some of these big corporations (And several governments) are being reckless with our planet, and I'd very much like them to stop.

Agree with you, but have a look at who are picking up all the 'green' contracts right now, and will manage the Carbon Trading - the same big business (and bankers) JB.

This is interesting though, and perhaps shows just how mixed all the environmental messages are becoming:
2nd November - Himalayan glaciers under threat - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8337207.stm
1st December - Himalayan glaciers' 'mixed picture' - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8355837.stm

Very different articles from the MSM outlet.

[Jensonb]

The BBC's climate change reporting is a joke and always has been. They're completely in two minds about it, can't get their story straight.

[Stephen]

The BBC's climate change reporting is a joke and always has been. They're completely in two minds about it, can't get their story straight.

Agreed, but no surprise given the email below - taken from the CRU hack.

"From: Joseph Alcamo <[email protected]>
To: [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Timing, Distribution of the Statement
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 18:52:xxx xxxx xxxx
Reply-to: [email protected]

Mike, Rob,

Sounds like you guys have been busy doing good things for the cause.

I would like to weigh in on two important questions --

Distribution for Endorsements --
I am very strongly in favor of as wide and rapid a distribution as
possible for endorsements. I think the only thing that counts is
numbers. The media is going to say "1000 scientists signed" or "1500
signed". No one is going to check if it is 600 with PhDs versus 2000
without. They will mention the prominent ones, but that is a
different story.

Conclusion -- Forget the screening, forget asking
them about their last publication (most will ignore you.) Get those
names!

Timing -- I feel strongly that the week of 24 November is too late.
1. We wanted to announce the Statement in the period when there was
a sag in related news, but in the week before Kyoto we should expect
that we will have to crowd out many other articles about climate.
2. If the Statement comes out just a few days before Kyoto I am
afraid that the delegates who we want to influence will not have any
time to pay attention to it. We should give them a few weeks to hear
about it.
3. If Greenpeace is having an event the week before, we should have
it a week before them so that they and other NGOs can further spread
the word about the Statement. On the other hand, it wouldn't be so
bad to release the Statement in the same week, but on a
diffeent day. The media might enjoy hearing the message from two
very different directions.

Conclusion -- I suggest the week of 10 November, or the week of 17
November at the latest.

Mike -- I have no organized email list that could begin to compete
with the list you can get from the Dutch. But I am still
willing to send you what I have, if you wish.

Best wishes,

Joe Alcamo

This isn't on.

[racechick]

Do you know I become more and more dishillousioned with people I think are doing things for good reasons Is this an age thing or what??

[emma]

I don't really want to get into the debate because I don't know enough about climate change to have a strong opinion - but I bet the sort of manipulation of data found in all the leaked info is just one example of something that happens in science and scientific research a lot the time...

As for what we should be doing about climate change - again, I don't know enough about it, but I don't think change is going to happen fast enough. At the rate we're going, it's might be too late - maybe not for us, but for generations yet to come. Maybe that's too many futuristic sci-fi disaster movies for you, but the world only has limited resources. We need to find other sources to tap into. A start has been made (with windfarms and solar panels etc), but I just think change is too slow. Because the real danger lies in the future, and doesn't actually threaten us, I don't think people are taking it seriously enough.

[Stephen]

http://www.copenhagenclimatechallenge.org/

[bud]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009 ... 766458.htm

19km long iceberg heading towards Western Australia.

[Gaz]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/12/09/2766458.htm

19km long iceberg heading towards Western Australia.

hey you can have your first snowball fight bud.

or build a snowman.

[Stephen]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/12/09/2766458.htm

19km long iceberg heading towards Western Australia.

OH NO - I BELIEVE, I BELIEVE IN AGW - IS IT TOO LATE TO SAVE THE WORLD?

Hang on, doesn't Antarctica melt every year? Oh it does, phew - just media spin then? Thank goodness.

[bud]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/12/09/2766458.htm

19km long iceberg heading towards Western Australia.

OH NO - I BELIEVE, I BELIEVE IN AGW - IS IT TOO LATE TO SAVE THE WORLD?

Hang on, doesn't Antarctica melt every year? Oh it does, phew - just media spin then? Thank goodness.

Ignorance, does it melt this much every year? no!

[Stephen]

http://www.news.com.au/antarctic-ice-is ... 5700043191

[bud]

yess the east coast is cooling in the last ten years?? its coinciding with the ozone hole healing its self within the last ten years. so of course youre going to get readings such as that. Overall whats happening on the west coast is concerning which the link you placed still indicates such.

its funny human activity emitting CFC's is to blame for the hole in the ozone ( something you northerners havent had to deal with. try living down here in your youth with skin cancer widespread) yet when human kind emitting Co2 at levels never before experienced in the billions of years history of the planet... then na its fine its harmless, no effect what so ever!

[Gaz]

yess the east coast is cooling in the last ten years?? its coinciding with the ozone hole healing its self within the last ten years. so of course youre going to get readings such as that. Overall whats happening on the west coast is concerning which the link you placed still indicates such.

its funny human activity emitting CFC's is to blame for the hole in the ozone ( something you northerners havent had to deal with. try living down here in your youth with skin cancer widespread) yet when human kind emitting Co2 at levels never before experienced in the billions of years history of the planet... then na its fine its harmless, no effect what so ever!

To be fair if you put suntan cream on you won't get skin cancer.

And there's alot of Skin Cancer in the UK also, from Tanning saloons.

[bud]

yess the east coast is cooling in the last ten years?? its coinciding with the ozone hole healing its self within the last ten years. so of course youre going to get readings such as that. Overall whats happening on the west coast is concerning which the link you placed still indicates such.

its funny human activity emitting CFC's is to blame for the hole in the ozone ( something you northerners havent had to deal with. try living down here in your youth with skin cancer widespread) yet when human kind emitting Co2 at levels never before experienced in the billions of years history of the planet... then na its fine its harmless, no effect what so ever!

To be fair if you put suntan cream on you won't get skin cancer.

And there's alot of Skin Cancer in the UK also, from Tanning saloons.

yeah tanning salons are a choice, and arent exactly related to the hole in the ozone which reaches Australia at points in the year. UV radiation is even more deadly. and trust me would you like putting on sunscreen when ever you had to walk out side?

[Stephen]

But bud, this is about AGW (aka MMGW) - temperatures will always fluctuate, and we've had vastly more CO2 in the atmosphere than we do now.

Does man have an affect on the planet? Of course.
Is he causing dangerous heating of the Earth through the output of CO2 (plant food)? No, probably not.