Yossarian wrote:No response to the referenced, scholarly article from a respected scientific journal explaining the likely cause of the pause?
monkey wrote:We're all drawing out evidence from Google I presume anyway, a company known for intentionally corrupting its search results, with an opaque formula for producing them and that has given money to and lobbied politicians to deny climate change.
dynamiteReady wrote:Here's another perspective. But seriously, my carbon footprint is very likely smaller than yours (and yours...), despite me having a car, so I won't be demonised. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/5067351/Rise-of-sea-levels-is-the-greatest-lie-ever-told.htmlYossarian wrote:No response to the referenced, scholarly article from a respected scientific journal explaining the likely cause of the pause?
Mörner has written a number of works claiming to provide theoretical support for dowsing.[19] He was elected "Deceiver of the year" by Föreningen Vetenskap och Folkbildning in 1995 for "organizing university courses about dowsing...".[3] In 1997 James Randi asked him to claim the One Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge, making a controlled experiment to prove that dowsing works.[20] Mörner declined the offer.[21]
Funkstain wrote:- Climate change is happening
- It is happening very quickly
- A major reason for the rapidity of change and the severity of change is humans
Without even going into the potential outcomes, which of these points do you dispute, and on what basis / what alternatives for the observed data do you have? It's that simple. Nothing to do with dogma, fanaticism, or bullshit articles in economy magazines. Just simple discussion. Please can you address this before continuing so we can have a constructive discussion?
Some tips for Griff there.Yossarian wrote:That's the single biggest thing you can do to reduce your carbon footprint unless you own a power station or take a private jet to work.
monkey wrote:The time has come for me to disengage from conversing with @dynamiteReady until he's at least attempted to address the below because he's all over the place at the moment, and seems to be scarcely reading other people's posts.I quote myself for clarity:- Climate change is happening - It is happening very quickly - A major reason for the rapidity of change and the severity of change is humans Without even going into the potential outcomes, which of these points do you dispute, and on what basis / what alternatives for the observed data do you have? It's that simple. Nothing to do with dogma, fanaticism, or bullshit articles in economy magazines. Just simple discussion. Please can you address this before continuing so we can have a constructive discussion?
Climate change is happening - It is happening very quickly - A major reason for the rapidity of change and the severity of change is humans.
not read the new postings and this is probably in here, BUT ANYWAY.dynamiteReady wrote:http://antigreen.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/the-latest-paper-from-swedish-sea-level.html See what I mean. This is a latter paper. It's all tit for tat shit. And for the billionth time, that's why I'm weary of arguments for both sides.
cockbeard wrote:We can't stop burning fossil fuels, and worse we can't do without plastics
Skerret wrote:And stop bullying Dyn-o-mite, he is nice.
cockbeard wrote:Vegetarian argument is far too simplistic. It is September and I can get spring onions, baby carrots, asparagus and new potatoes. Where have they travelled from?
equinox_code wrote:Even if it's all made up, even if all these scientific experts are covering their backs and fishing for grants with their doomsday hypothes, even if all that is possibly true, what is the worst that could happen? We waste a lot of time/money cutting back on mindless consumption and pollution for the sake of nothing? I'd certainly take that over total population collapse and the end of a habitable planet.
cockbeard wrote:Go on then, give me a scenario that would be agreeable to a high percentage of the population, where we can stop burning fossil fuel and do without plastics. Because it isn't about capitalism, it's about expectation and maybe consumerism. I feel consumerism and capitalism are too separate things and should be treated as such Me personally, I could give two shits if the streetlights went out tomorrow, I'm very good at campcraft
cockbeard wrote:What do you think would reduce your ecological footprint more, going vegetarian or turning your back on supermarkets?
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!