Climate change is to blame, apparently.
Discussion
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-1091...
So it's 'partly' to blame. What they mean is they are maybe a little too scared to say it's fully to blame, but they want to scare people anyway.
Love the snippet of info from the Met Office (who cannot predict tomorrow's weather accurately, let alone further into the future) saying there are likely to be more higher temperatures in the future.
Jeff Knight, a climate variability scientist at the UK Met Office, attributed the situation in Moscow to a number of factors, among them greenhouse gas concentrations, which are steadily rising.
So what are the other factors?
So it's 'partly' to blame. What they mean is they are maybe a little too scared to say it's fully to blame, but they want to scare people anyway.
Love the snippet of info from the Met Office (who cannot predict tomorrow's weather accurately, let alone further into the future) saying there are likely to be more higher temperatures in the future.
Jeff Knight, a climate variability scientist at the UK Met Office, attributed the situation in Moscow to a number of factors, among them greenhouse gas concentrations, which are steadily rising.
So what are the other factors?
Edited by funkyrobot on Wednesday 11th August 11:05
funkyrobot said:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-1091...
So it's 'partly' to blame. What they mean is they are maybe a little too scared to say it's fully to blame, but they want to scare people anyway.
Love the snippedt of info from the Met Office (who cannot predict tomorrow's weather accurately, let alone further into the future) saying there are likely to be more higher temperatures in th future.
Jeff Knight, a climate variability scientist at the UK Met Office, attributed the situation in Moscow to a number of factors, among them greenhouse gas concentrations, which are steadily rising.
So what are the other factors?
Drunk russians smoking in forests.So it's 'partly' to blame. What they mean is they are maybe a little too scared to say it's fully to blame, but they want to scare people anyway.
Love the snippedt of info from the Met Office (who cannot predict tomorrow's weather accurately, let alone further into the future) saying there are likely to be more higher temperatures in th future.
Jeff Knight, a climate variability scientist at the UK Met Office, attributed the situation in Moscow to a number of factors, among them greenhouse gas concentrations, which are steadily rising.
So what are the other factors?
They were pushing the line quite a bit recently.
Curries must now be eaten with Naan only as rice runs out
Curries must now be eaten with Naan only as rice runs out
kerplunk said:
Saying GHG's are fully to blame would be as unreasonable as saying GHG's aren't a factor at all, but I'm sure someone will soon! 
There is no observational evidence in global climate data that human emissions of GHGs are a factor at all - let's get it right - which is a different matter to saying there is an invisibly small and insiginificant theoretical effect indistinguishable from zero which is vastly overwhelmed by natural forcing. Which is the fact of the matter, not scary, not worthy of drastic tax and control idiocy, so it can't be expressed that way or the game is up.Flooding has been far worse in the past with lower GHG levels, hottest this and coldest that have been hotter and colder in the past with lower GHG levels, so any statement attributing such matters to GHG effects is fanciful imagination flying in the face of an absolute lack of causality.
Quite the opposite in fact for the UK (and elsewhere) as the higher levels of a particular weak GHG today appear to be 'producing' less flooding as per 1952 and less drought / weaker heatwaves as here as per 1976 when this GHG was at significantly lower levels. I'm sure many PHers can remember the last two weeks of June and the first week of July when temperatures remained over 30 deg C in parts of the country.
So the 'conclusion' has to be that higher tax gas levels produce lower temperatures and less flooding. Or that climate frenzy PR guff is junk as per the 'science' it seeks to promote.
andy_s said:
Climate Change is sooo 2008, anyone who is anyone is now scared by financial instability after a short spell of retro kitsch domestic terrorism doncha knar...
Tell that the to CRC (carbon reduction commitment) clan.Today, I have to register my company in this farce to show willingness to reduce our carbon footprint.
If, by the 30th Sep, I haven't then we get fined £5000.
If, today, I do I pay the CRC clan £900 for the pleasure followed by yearly 'subsistence' charges of £1290.
Repeat across the rest of the country - private and public business alike.
remedy said:
andy_s said:
Climate Change is sooo 2008, anyone who is anyone is now scared by financial instability after a short spell of retro kitsch domestic terrorism doncha knar...
Tell that the to CRC (carbon reduction commitment) clan.Today, I have to register my company in this farce to show willingness to reduce our carbon footprint.
If, by the 30th Sep, I haven't then we get fined £5000.
If, today, I do I pay the CRC clan £900 for the pleasure followed by yearly 'subsistence' charges of £1290.
Repeat across the rest of the country - private and public business alike.
Farkin 'ell.remedy said:
andy_s said:
Climate Change is sooo 2008, anyone who is anyone is now scared by financial instability after a short spell of retro kitsch domestic terrorism doncha knar...
Tell that the to CRC (carbon reduction commitment) clan.Today, I have to register my company in this farce to show willingness to reduce our carbon footprint.
If, by the 30th Sep, I haven't then we get fined £5000.
If, today, I do I pay the CRC clan £900 for the pleasure followed by yearly 'subsistence' charges of £1290.
Repeat across the rest of the country - private and public business alike.
jbi said:
remedy said:
andy_s said:
Climate Change is sooo 2008, anyone who is anyone is now scared by financial instability after a short spell of retro kitsch domestic terrorism doncha knar...
Tell that the to CRC (carbon reduction commitment) clan.Today, I have to register my company in this farce to show willingness to reduce our carbon footprint.
If, by the 30th Sep, I haven't then we get fined £5000.
If, today, I do I pay the CRC clan £900 for the pleasure followed by yearly 'subsistence' charges of £1290.
Repeat across the rest of the country - private and public business alike.
Carbon
copy of the last green mad shower.Nothing changes...
except more emptying of 'our' pockets.
Give 'em another 12 months tops.
Edited by dandarez on Wednesday 11th August 14:42
dandarez said:
jbi said:
remedy said:
andy_s said:
Climate Change is sooo 2008, anyone who is anyone is now scared by financial instability after a short spell of retro kitsch domestic terrorism doncha knar...
Tell that the to CRC (carbon reduction commitment) clan.Today, I have to register my company in this farce to show willingness to reduce our carbon footprint.
If, by the 30th Sep, I haven't then we get fined £5000.
If, today, I do I pay the CRC clan £900 for the pleasure followed by yearly 'subsistence' charges of £1290.
Repeat across the rest of the country - private and public business alike.
Nothing changes...
except more emptying of 'our' pockets.
Give 'em another 12 months tops.
Also, the monies collected from companies in the CRC Energy Efficiency Scheme (to give it its full title) are meant to be redistributed to all the companies taking part....with the top of the class getting the larger share of the spoils, so to speak.
So, you can't call 'tax' on this one, I'm afraid....cos it is a ridiculous, ill thought out scheme all the same...
Edited by Get Karter on Wednesday 11th August 14:47
Get Karter said:
Also, the monies collected from companies in the CRC Energy Efficiency Scheme (to give it its full title) are meant to be redistributed to all the companies taking part....with the top of the class getting the larger share of the spoils, so to speak.
So this is publicly funded organisation that takes your money and redistributes it to what it considers to be worthy recipients, but it is not taxation?Not sure about that one !
Arnold The Bat said:
And he even looks like a scientist!Arnold The Bat said:
That man is brilliant!
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff