Climate scientists

[BlasterBates]

There are even weeds growing round the AGW gravestone.

[BlasterBates]

I'll reserve judgement on the Spencer and Bradwell paper, noting only a recent history of 'last nail in the coffin of AGW' press releases about papers that turn out not to even dent the concensus.

Spencer's track record however certainly does not inspire confidence.

The coffin is now firmly in the grave, under 2 foot of dirt.

[Spacecadet]

If you want to be cautious and adopt the precautionary pricnciple, house on stilts is a good idea. no ?

or maybe its going a teeny bit OTT ?


madness

I almost built my house on stilts for the very reason you mentioned but then thought "what if there is a nuclear war after all?". So I built it underground and avoided the sea level problem by building the entrance 30 meters up (there is a ramp up to the front door).
Of course 2 days after moving my neighbour started asking me what earthquake proofing I'd had installed

[snaw]

If you want to be cautious and adopt the precautionary pricnciple, house on stilts is a good idea. no ?

or maybe its going a teeny bit OTT ?


madness

There's a bell curve with every opinion, that's at the far end I suspect.

[EternalOptimist]

Houses on stilts - that's a new one, who proposed that?

If you want to be cautious and adopt the precautionary pricnciple, house on stilts is a good idea. no ?

or maybe its going a teeny bit OTT ?


sick to death

[snaw]

wrong because most sceptics accept the greenhouse theory

I didn't say they didn't.

[EternalOptimist]

What, wrong to be cautious? Maybe, I accepted that I could be - but I'd rather be wrong being cautious than vice versa, as I stated.

Houses on stilts - that's a new one, who proposed that?

wrong because most sceptics accept the greenhouse theory

[snaw]

I think you are wrong here. Most sceptics accept that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and that mankind has increased the amount of CO2.

It's the policies that are proposed that are mad. Building new houses on stilts because of a wonky model ? crazy

What, wrong to be cautious? Maybe, I accepted that I could be - but I'd rather be wrong being cautious than vice versa, as I stated.

Houses on stilts - that's a new one, who proposed that?

[shaunbhoy]

.
I'm going to work on my Plan D (A,B and C already having been outsourced).

FTFY

[EternalOptimist]

I always figured err on the side of caution. There's strong evidence to support climate change caused by man-made activities. There should be room for debate as to how much, without shouting them down as loonies.

But I think I'd rather be cautious and wrong, than carefree and wrong - the implications are so much bigger one way than the other.

And it doesn't help the climate sceptic cause that the people who are so vociferous about it, tend to be the same people who deny evolution (At least in America anyway)

I think you are wrong here. Most sceptics accept that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and that mankind has increased the amount of CO2.

It's the policies that are proposed that are mad. Building new houses on stilts because of a wonky model ? crazy