Comics UK

Is Global Warming just another legal taxation.

Surely if global warming was true the government would restrict flights and they would stop flying to Global Warming meetings, and stop driving round in luxurious cars polluting the atomospehre.

Is it Earths natural cycle?

Anyone remember the 1970's when they said we were due for a new Ice Age.

Do we trust our govenment and scientists, even the weathermen can't predict getting the weather right a few days ahead.

And the latest scientist not having the data on the Glaciers melting.

I don't know what to believe now.

We're all doomed.

Not going to give a full answer as work today has been not fun and included a 14 hr day, but if you mean Global Warming as a scare tactic used by politicians to justify a hike in taxes then yes.

If other meanings are implied by your question SC, then please expand on the original post.

colcool007 wrote: If other meanings are implied by your question SC, then please expand on the original post.

Their's obviously something going on with the Earth
is the Supposedly Global warming man made or Earths natural cycle?

I don't think the poll is working(must be global warming )

I'm not quite sure what your poll is asking. Is it "Yes, Global Warming is a reality" or "Yes, it's a hoax"?

Lew

The poll was a bit confusing,
That's forget I ever did this drink fueled OP last night.

steelclaw wrote:Is Global Warming just another legal taxation.

Surely if global warming was true the government would restrict flights and they would stop flying to Global Warming meetings, and stop driving round in luxurious cars polluting the atomospehre.

Would you vote for for restrictions on your life? That's the problem. If one party says we're going to raise taxes, stop you flying, make petrol terrifickly expensive etc, then another party says, we won't, who do you vote for?

Then of course, what's the impact of that if the US or China won't stop their relentless march?

steelclaw wrote: Anyone remember the 1970's when they said we were due for a new Ice Age.

It's only been 10,000 years since the last one. We might still be in an Ice Age but a warmer period (aka an inter-glacial). They've lasted a lot longer than 10,000 years in the past. Enough for tropical rainforests to develop, for instance.

steelclaw wrote: Do we trust our govenment and scientists, even the weathermen can't predict getting the weather right a few days ahead.

It's a very different predictive mechanism. How can you trust Radio Scotland that Celtic will be among the Top 6 at the end of the season, if they can't even predict that they can beat Kilmarnock? Because long-termism allows for fluctuations, in the way that short-term is punished by them.

steelclaw wrote: And the latest scientist not having the data on the Glaciers melting.

I don't know what to believe now.

Complete hype. If you had diabetes for instance, then you would go to a doctor that specialises in it. Now it could be that all these thousands of specialists are wrong and the salesman with a valid interest in selling sugar snacks actually has the right idea...but I'd advise trusting the experts. Similarly, when the biggest voice against climate change (a better phrase, it won't necessarily be warmer everywhere) is oilmen & industrialists (e.g. Bush, Murdoch), how much trust can you have?

I know some might say the scientists have a valid interest too but there's a lot more money in 'proving' no relationship ('carry on drilling, boys'). A global scientific conspiracy is the stuff of comics, I'm afraid.

Chris (PhD Environmental Science & Technology)

It's only been 10,000 years since the last one. We might still be in an Ice Age but a warmer period (aka an inter-glacial). They've lasted a lot longer than 10,000 years in the past. Enough for tropical rainforests to develop, for instance.

Exactly so it's not man made.
It's a load of hype global warming the biggest con this century.

steelclaw wrote:

It's only been 10,000 years since the last one. We might still be in an Ice Age but a warmer period (aka an inter-glacial). They've lasted a lot longer than 10,000 years in the past. Enough for tropical rainforests to develop, for instance.

Exactly so it's not man made.
It's a load of hype global warming the biggest con this century.

Well, as you've already made your mind up it seems the poll is redundant.

steelclaw wrote:The poll was a bit confusing,
That's forget I ever did this drink fueled OP last night.

And the moral of this story is don't drink and post.

Lew

steelclaw wrote:

It's only been 10,000 years since the last one. We might still be in an Ice Age but a warmer period (aka an inter-glacial). They've lasted a lot longer than 10,000 years in the past. Enough for tropical rainforests to develop, for instance.

Exactly so it's not man made.
It's a load of hype global warming the biggest con this century.

That was pretty much my conclusion, too. It's a natural cycle. We may be making an impact, but I doubt it's much of one.

I find wave, tidal, wind and solor power very exciting..especially if they get better and better..I think its good for inventors to get inventing..
I'm sure I read some where that solar panels can be printed off like paper now..very thin..and I'm sure wave power is the way forward..with there long mechanical snake..
I like the windmills for wind...very mesmerising to watch at sea..In 50 years time we may need other forms of energy anyway..

I agree it is more a cycle..rather than man made..
though pollution is wrong in China.bad for people living nearby..

tony ingram wrote:

steelclaw wrote:

It's only been 10,000 years since the last one. We might still be in an Ice Age but a warmer period (aka an inter-glacial). They've lasted a lot longer than 10,000 years in the past. Enough for tropical rainforests to develop, for instance.

Exactly so it's not man made.
It's a load of hype global warming the biggest con this century.

That was pretty much my conclusion, too. It's a natural cycle. We may be making an impact, but I doubt it's much of one.

Yeah, but it's not a conclusion is it? It's just a thought based on a feeling. Where's your data to back it up?

The models for climate change show clear correlation with the industrial revolution. There is a linear trend that's grown exponentially between CO2 output and the industrial activity at the time.

If you've got data that suggests otherwise, let's hear it.

To switch to renewable sources makes sense,as does recycling.

This planet only has finite resources.

On Global Warming-not convinced,the Climate Change lobby has just as much financial interest in proving their side as Big Business has theirs.

I do find it frightening that the media is so in the pockets of the climate change lobby.BBC Journalists even moved their pensions in to a Climate Change friendly fund.(No conflict of interest there)

Lew Stringer wrote:

steelclaw wrote:

It's only been 10,000 years since the last one. We might still be in an Ice Age but a warmer period (aka an inter-glacial). They've lasted a lot longer than 10,000 years in the past. Enough for tropical rainforests to develop, for instance.

Exactly so it's not man made.
It's a load of hype global warming the biggest con this century.

Well, as you've already made your mind up it seems the poll is redundant.

steelclaw wrote:The poll was a bit confusing,
That's forget I ever did this drink fueled OP last night.

And the moral of this story is don't drink and post.

Lew

Thanks Lew that made me laugh

Saw a repeat of Have I Got News For You last night in which they were discussing this very subject. Reginald D Hunter said he had tried an experiment to see if global warming was happening. 'I left some ice cubes in a glass outside, but when I came back only half of them had melted. So my research is inconclusive at this point'.

So many points to go off on a tangent on here.

As to Don't Drink And Post, I think that should be a motto across the globe.

But let's get back to Global Warming. I agree that the inter-glacial period is cyclic. There is too much hard data to dismiss that fact as something "made up to scare us". And that we are in the middle of one such period is hard to argue with.

But anyone who declares that industrialization is having no effect will have their argument rebutted by simply examing the asthma figures for the UK in regard to the steady increase of motorised vehicles powered by hydrocarbons. This shows a correlation with the increase with asthma cases. And for this increase in vehicles on the roads, it requires additional degrees of industrilization so that vehicles are more available to the population, regardless of their economic potential or power.

More to follow later as I now have decided to Drink instead of Post!