• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

'5 ways to save the world' BBC2 (last night)

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #21
    Originally posted by Paddy
    The Earth is colder than it was 500 years ago and much colder that it was 2000 years. ago
    Really? where do you get your facts from... Exxon weekly?

    I googled the time period you mention and here is scientific backed proof to prove you wrong.

    http://www.scienceblog.com/community...199701654.html
    Science isn't about why, it's about why not. You ask: why is so much of our science dangerous? I say: why not marry safe science if you love it so much. In fact, why not invent a special safety door that won't hit you in the butt on the way out, because you are fired. - Cave Johnson

    Comment


      #22
      Originally posted by Jawz
      we are already way off the scale
      Not true. Your Earthlings with your puny human brains are so amusing.

      Your planet is not as warm as it was in the 14th and 15th Centuries and nowhere near as warm as it was in the 2nd and 3rd Centuries.

      You deserve everything you get when we bombard you with cosmic rays and smash your cities with meteorites in the 22nd Century.

      Comment


        #23
        Originally posted by Dalek Supreme
        Not true. Your Earthlings with your puny human brains are so amusing.

        Your planet is not as warm as it was in the 14th and 15th Centuries and nowhere near as warm as it was in the 2nd and 3rd Centuries.

        You deserve everything you get when we bombard you with cosmic rays and smash your cities with meteorites in the 22nd Century.
        May I refer the gentleman/robotic wheelie bin to the answer I gave earlier.
        Science isn't about why, it's about why not. You ask: why is so much of our science dangerous? I say: why not marry safe science if you love it so much. In fact, why not invent a special safety door that won't hit you in the butt on the way out, because you are fired. - Cave Johnson

        Comment


          #24
          Originally posted by gingerjedi
          May I refer the gentleman/robotic wheelie bin to the answer I gave earlier.
          Am I looking at the right thing? I don't see any mention of the 2nd, 3rd, 14th or 15th centuries in it
          Boom boom boom boom
          A-haw haw haw haw
          Hmmm hmmm hmmm hmmm
          Hmmm hmmm hmmm hmmm

          Comment


            #25
            Originally posted by gingerjedi
            May I refer the gentleman/robotic wheelie bin to the answer I gave earlier.
            May I advise the ginger one to read more carefully. His posted article only covers the time since 1500, neatly excluding the warmer period preceeding it.

            Try here for an overview of the period actually under discussion (it was a little earlier than I thought): http://www.objectivescience.com/arti...nt_warming.htm

            The concordance of those diverse climate indicators over the world says that the twentieth century was not unusually warm compared with earlier times. Cambridge University researchers write that the medieval warming "was a global event occurring between about 900 and 1250 A.D., possibly interrupted by a minor re-advance of ice between about 1050 and 1150 A.D."

            The facts are simple. The Little Optimum and Little Ice Age were real. They were also widespread over the globe. The twentieth century is not the least bit climatically unusual. So why the recent media hysteria that the twentieth century is the warmest of the last 1,000 years?

            Comment


              #26
              Originally posted by wonderwaif
              Am I looking at the right thing? I don't see any mention of the 2nd, 3rd, 14th or 15th centuries in it
              Don’t be so fecking pedantic, I just found a scientific article that reflected the period mentioned in a previous post.
              Science isn't about why, it's about why not. You ask: why is so much of our science dangerous? I say: why not marry safe science if you love it so much. In fact, why not invent a special safety door that won't hit you in the butt on the way out, because you are fired. - Cave Johnson

              Comment


                #27
                Originally posted by gingerjedi
                Don’t be so fecking pedantic, I just found a scientific article that reflected the period mentioned in a previous post.
                Ah! insults. typical Labour smear tactics.
                You were just plain wrong.
                Boom boom boom boom
                A-haw haw haw haw
                Hmmm hmmm hmmm hmmm
                Hmmm hmmm hmmm hmmm

                Comment


                  #28
                  Originally posted by gingerjedi
                  Don’t be so fecking pedantic, I just found a scientific article that reflected the period mentioned in a previous post.
                  No you didn't. You found an article that covered the period after it, 16th Century onwards. The UN has been criticised several times for starting its graphs in 1500 as it makes them appear more alarming. If you plot back to the 1st Century AD, a similar graph appears rather ho-hum. The Romans cultivated vines at Vindolanda (near Hexham). Not much chance of that now even if temeperatures do rise by 3-6C.
                  Last edited by Dalek Supreme; 20 February 2007, 15:20.

                  Comment


                    #29
                    Originally posted by Paddy
                    I don’t know if you are serious but many people including some politicians don’t know the difference between CFCs and CO2. CFS allegedly destroy the Ozone layer that filter UV; nothing to do with global warming. Also the Hole in the Ozone layer is closing up, yet another natural fluctuation.
                    "Ozone (O3) is an important natural greenhouse gas in the stratosphere and the troposphere.... the reduction of ozone concentrations in the stratosphere due to CFC's has a cooling effect..."

                    http://lbs.hh.schule.de/welcome.phtm...use/gases.html
                    God made men. Sam Colt made them equal.

                    Comment


                      #30
                      Originally posted by gingerjedi
                      Don’t be so fecking pedantic, I just found a scientific article that reflected the period mentioned in a previous post.
                      Don't get stroppy just because you have no answer.

                      Fact is: Science can not yet explain the last warm period and last mini ice age.

                      I asked for proof, not some blog which may have an ulterior motive for its findings.
                      I am not qualified to give the above advice!

                      The original point and click interface by
                      Smith and Wesson.

                      Step back, have a think and adjust my own own attitude from time to time

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X