Benzine
|
| posted on 24/12/09 at 12:44 PM |
|
|
Oh okay. In terms of climate change I believe that man's actions are tipping the scales. I'm not trying to provoke a reaction. I want to
know what people are doing to make a difference.
If I got an illness that was fatal without treatment then I'd take the antibiotics/treatment. I wouldn't say "oh I should really
take it" and not.
The mental gymnastics a landlord will employ to justify immoral actions is clinically fascinating. Just because something is legal doesn't make
it moral.
|
|
|
|
|
Jasper
|
| posted on 24/12/09 at 01:11 PM |
|
|
Trouble is, what we do on a personal level has such a tiny impact, even the UK as a whole is a drop in the ocean compared to China/India etc.
I think as long as we do what's sensible, recycling, energy saving appliances/bulbs etc, more fuel efficient cars etc then it's ok, and
it's something we should do even if we weren't affecting the climate, just to save money and resources.
If you're not living life on the edge you're taking up too much room.
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 26/12/09 at 04:41 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by twybrow
This is my answer:
it does track it....!
I'll see if she can reply too!
Sorry I didn't word my query very well...it's well known there is a correlation between CO2 levels and mean temperature, but what I want
to see is proof of causality.
The temperature/CO2 data have been regularly 'adjusted' by zealots on either side of the argument to show whatever they want it to show.
|
|
|
RK
|
| posted on 26/12/09 at 10:19 PM |
|
|
Just like in real, face to face conversations, the original topic is sometimes twisted and even forgotten, as people move around a discussion.
|
|
|
zilspeed
|
| posted on 26/12/09 at 10:35 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by RK
Just like in real, face to face conversations, the original topic is sometimes twisted and even forgotten, as people move around a discussion.
As the original poster, that's also my thoughts.
Apparently this is the worst winter - so far - that we've had in this part of the world for 20 years, again "apparently". The whole
issue discussed further up the thread is bigger than any of us, but if what we're experiencing right now is any sort of indicator of how life
would be if the North Atlantic Drift were to stop, we all in the UK have reason to be interested in the implications.
You're in Canada, where I imagine significant snowfall is rather more readily dealt with than it is here.
As I type, snowflakes the size of biscuits are falling here for the 7th day on the trot. It's a long time since I saw that around these parts.
I'm sure it'll all be gone in a week and we'll all move on 
|
|
|
RK
|
| posted on 26/12/09 at 11:04 PM |
|
|
Yeah, I do hope it goes away, because for me, I can't tell if my car is running like crap because of the cold weather or just running like crap
in general, and won't be able to confirm it til May!!
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 27/12/09 at 12:49 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MikeRJ
Sorry I didn't word my query very well...it's well known there is a correlation between CO2 levels and mean temperature, but what I want
to see is proof of causality.
how could you possibly prove it beyond doubt? You know how hard it was to 'prove' the link between smoking and cancer, indeed im not sure
they have yet, beyond statistics.
You will not get 100% proof, so you have to decide if a majority verdict will do you. If it wont, you have to ask yourself why you are so keen not to
believe it?
Beware! Bourettes is binfectious.
|
|
|
t.j.
|
| posted on 28/12/09 at 09:50 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by JoelP
quote:
Originally posted by MikeRJ
Sorry I didn't word my query very well...it's well known there is a correlation between CO2 levels and mean temperature, but what I want
to see is proof of causality.
how could you possibly prove it beyond doubt? You know how hard it was to 'prove' the link between smoking and cancer, indeed im not sure
they have yet, beyond statistics.
You will not get 100% proof, so you have to decide if a majority verdict will do you. If it wont, you have to ask yourself why you are so keen not to
believe it?
Aha! So it's a believe= religion....
You know how it works:
Separation of church and state
So you think 350 years back the same equipment was used? And IF the climate really changed.
- Why not save the forest in Brasil.
- Help the poor so they can produce own food (and O2).
- etc
No tax, invest in our own researchers and CO2 trading that helpes. 
Please feel free to correct my bad English, i'm still learning. Your Dutch is awfull! :-)
|
|
|
Rob Palin
|
| posted on 28/12/09 at 11:52 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by t.j.
Aha! So it's a believe= religion....
You know how it works:
Separation of church and state
So you think 350 years back the same equipment was used? And IF the climate really changed.
- Why not save the forest in Brasil.
- Help the poor so they can produce own food (and O2).
- etc
No tax, invest in our own researchers and CO2 trading that helpes.
To compare the acceptance of >90% confidence in a conclusion drawn from experimental data is not the same as having faith in a religion. Faith is
continued belief in the absence of evidence (or against evidence to the contrary).
I wish it was possible for this whole subject to extract out the hyperbole, spin and political gamesmanship and just rest on the science. Crucially
it is science that it the biggest loser from all this arguing as people are turning their backs on it in the mistaken belief that it cannot be trusted
and that uninformed opinion is somehow equally valid.
|
|
|
