CH4 News Bellamy V Public enemy number 1
Discussion
George Mombiot the biggest threat to civilisation on the planet has just brow beaten Bellamy on Chanel 4 news. This is indicatative of how the green slime plan to operate in the future. Mombiot had no evidence to support his lies, yet the chanel 4 green management failed to give Bellamy sufficient time to rubbish his arguement. While the media colludes with slime like this the future prosperity of Britain hangs in the balance.
good luck FellasSorry, but Monbiot slaughtered Bellamy. Bellamy ended up looking like an ill-informed, babbling idiot. I tend to, on balance, believe that we are causing the climate to warm up, but surely the anti-global warming lobby could find someone more competent than Bellamy to represent them.
Suckmychrsitmas said:That's the key issue here, you believe. This may be a chance use of words, but it's apt since there is no evidence from satellite or balloon measurements that mankind's activities are causing the atmosphere (or even the surface, across the globe) to heat up. The atmosphere has cooled over a significant period towards the end of the last century (the 1990's) So, out of interest, where does this faith come from?
I tend to, on balance, believe that we are causing the climate to warm up...
As for Monbigot and Bellamy, the true believers typified by Monbigot believe that shouting louder and vilifying individuals makes them right. They must resort to this - and telling things not quite as they are - as there is no credible evidence supporting their position.
I believe that the world's temperature fluctuates like most things in the galaxy. What amazes me are the activists (I refuse to call them environmentalists - environmentalism is a science) who seem to think that we insignificant little apes with an existence of a couple of million years, are somehow self-important enough to think we can bring about the sort of climate change that wiped out the dinosaurs by, err, burning the dinosaurs.
I'll admit, we're probably not helping, but I'm hoping that one day we'll be able to look back with new scientific knowledge and say how short-sighted those greens were.
Oh, and did anyone else know that George Monbiot was once sectioned as being insane somewhere? I can't comprehend his recent rise out of obscurity. The man is a menace.
I'll admit, we're probably not helping, but I'm hoping that one day we'll be able to look back with new scientific knowledge and say how short-sighted those greens were.
Oh, and did anyone else know that George Monbiot was once sectioned as being insane somewhere? I can't comprehend his recent rise out of obscurity. The man is a menace.
Twincam16 said:
I believe that the world's temperature fluctuates like most things in the galaxy. What amazes me are the activists (I refuse to call them environmentalists - environmentalism is a science) who seem to think that we insignificant little apes with an existence of a couple of million years, are somehow self-important enough to think we can bring about the sort of climate change that wiped out the dinosaurs by, err, burning the dinosaurs.
I'll admit, we're probably not helping, but I'm hoping that one day we'll be able to look back with new scientific knowledge and say how short-sighted those greens were.
Oh, and did anyone else know that George Monbiot was once sectioned as being insane somewhere? I can't comprehend his recent rise out of obscurity. The man is a menace.
You had a look-see at his website? Scary. Truely Scary.
_VTEC_ said:
I believe that the world's temperature fluctuates like most things in the galaxy. What amazes me are the activists (I refuse to call them environmentalists - environmentalism is a science) who seem to think that we insignificant little apes with an existence of a couple of million years, are somehow self-important enough to think we can bring about the sort of climate change that wiped out the dinosaurs by, err, burning the dinosaurs.
I'll admit, we're probably not helping, but I'm hoping that one day we'll be able to look back with new scientific knowledge and say how short-sighted those greens were.
Oh, and did anyone else know that George Monbiot was once sectioned as being insane somewhere? I can't comprehend his recent rise out of obscurity. The man is a menace.
You had a look-see at his website? Scary. Truely Scary.
Terrifying I know - especially his 'black box car control' proposition. That's just the sort of thing I don't want accessible to impressionable transport ministers!
D_Mike said:
no "ism" is a science! isms are too biased.
edited for stupid vocalulary error!
>> Edited by D_Mike on Tuesday 10th May 20:23
What about 'environmental scientist'? It's a bit of a mouthful so it gets shortened to 'environmentalist'.
The term has been hijacked by people who should be called 'green activists', but environmentalism as a movement has a basis in science, realism and rationalism.
Suckmychrsitmas said:
Sorry, but Monbiot slaughtered Bellamy. Bellamy ended up looking like an ill-informed, babbling idiot. I tend to, on balance, believe that we are causing the climate to warm up, but surely the anti-global warming lobby could find someone more competent than Bellamy to represent them.
It is very worrying that you would side with evil trash like Mombiot. Bellamy is a reasonable man so he is unlikely to win an argument with the bigotted anti car champion, particularly when backed by Humphries who is well known as a believer in Global warming bullshit. Why would anyone other than a fully paid up lentilmuncher believe in "evidence" created by computer models? All the data concludes that man made global warming is a myth. The only reason for believing in it is for reasons of revenge on the capitalist system which has destroyed the communist ideal. The Humphries / Mombiot model is to rip the guts out of the economy until it can no longer perform. The same mentality has destroyed our manufacturing base and reduced our media to little more than lentilist whingers. The solution is to stop being so nice and start hitting these scum hard with the kind of verbal battering that Galloway gave Paxman.
agent006 said:
Does this Bellamy person have a first name or are you going to keep us guessing as to who he is?
David Bellamy - a naturalist and environmentalist who used to do loads of TV programmes, who recently said he doesn't agree with the arguments put forward on global warming to the chagrin of the more left-wing biased political activists who thought he was on their side.
Twincam16 said:Here are those little - and not so little - fluctuations. The graph forms are from an IPCC Report, so it'll be tough for the true believers to rubbish the fact that the planet has seen much larger temperature shifts over much shorter periods of time than those they want us to get scared about now and accept the blame for. But no doubt they'd try. These graphs are off the ABD's website as I don't have web hosting facilities, but they're from the IPCC originally.
I believe that the world's temperature fluctuates
Recently, the atmosphere has cooled significantly, you can see the trend here, when it should have been warming up. There's no Green explanation in terms of mankind's activities since it occurred at time of relatively high carbon dioxide output and level. Then you realise that carbon dioxide levels have been up to 18 times higher in the past than now, all naturally, and you wonder what the fuss is about anyway. Whatever, here are the surface temperature data from NOAA satellites. Apart from El Nino warming and volcanic eruption cooling, there's not a lot happening. The southern hemisphere is actually cooling slightly.
Twincam16 said:So the question is, how are we harming? Carbon dioxide is the Green's enemy of choice, but every research paper looking at transitions when temperature and carbon dioxide levels change together and there is sufficient time resolution to see the order of events, the temperature change comes first. One such result from Monnin et al is here
I'll admit, we're probably not helping...
My own literature searches showed this with about six or seven papers all saying the same thing, but in case I might be missing something in my ripening age, I asked an IPCC Lead Author if there were any with the other order that he or the IPCC knew of and had written about, and the answer was a straight NO. And of course, more often than not, the temperature and carbon dioxide indicators are out of synch, as shown by Prof Jan Veizer, so feedback loops look to be much less important than the Greens would have us believe.
This all makes it quite impossible for mankind's emissions of carbon dioxide to be a major direct cause of so-called 'global warming'.
Suckmychrsitmas, I'm not sure but your PH career may have started after the bulk of the previous global warming threads finished, so I thought you might like to see some of the data.
Marki said:
It is a fact (global warming ) now i can not belive we have not had an adverse affect on this , but it is also proved to be a natural phenmenom .
Yes, so's global cooling - climate change is a natural phenomenon. The causes are these:
SHORT TERM
22 year magnetic sunspot cycle, 88 year Gleissberg cycle, and 206 year cycle of solar variability
MEDIUM TERM - largely the Milankovitch cycles:
26,000 year cycle of the 'wobble' with precession of the equinoxes
40,000 year cycle of the +/- 1.5° change in the Earth's axial tilt
100,000 year cycle in the eccentricity of Earth's elliptical orbit
LONGER TERM
225,000,000 year cycle on the cosmic ray flux (and smaller sub-cycles) due to rotation of the Solar System about the galactic centre which takes the Earth up and down through the galactic plane, interstellar dust density and cosmic ray fluxes change as a result
Slowing of the Earth's rotation is also there to play with. Odd to think there were once 465 days in a year.
PLUS IMPORTANT SPORADIC EVENTS
Volcanic activity, other tectonic activity, nearby supernovae, asteroidal impact, cometary impact
It does look as though these factors will fail to respond to Gordon Brown's fiscal policies, and I doubt even the UN IPCC has sufficient cosmic influence. It's also unlikely Monbigot's ego is sufficiently powerful, but you never know
Marki, having read and seen some evidence (hopefully) are you still a secure believer?
>> Edited by turbobloke on Tuesday 10th May 20:59
Devlis advocate here Turbobloke, but I presented some of your evidence to a colleague who was voting Greens and his first question was - how do you know what the temperature was all them years ago? Presuming we didn't have cavemen sat recording them I guess there's a way of knowing through some form of geological process? If so, how can we be sure it's 100% reliable?
ck son of a bitch to just "ferk orf" is beyond me....
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff