Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Evil Monkey

Earnie's Hummer

Recommended Posts

To answer the question about which car I drive... I don''t drive one at all! I don''t even hold a licence!  I cycle or walk most places that I can, and use public transport for most other things (though I am, admittedly, flying to Italy next month but this will be my first flight in 2 years).  I actively recycle, make sure all my electrical points are switched off when not in use and the lights in my Halls are energy saving and motion sensitive.  I''m also thinking of lobbying the Vice Chancellor of my Uni to convert to biological sewage treatment systems, which are cheap and very, very effective.  Little things, and I''ll make very little difference on my own... but if all of us did it...??So why do I do all this? Because of a "myth"? No, because of the facts.  Sorry, Cluck, but your attitude on this, like on so much else, stinks to high heaven of some kind of bitterness about the whole world! We''re all being lied to about everything and everything is sh*t... except, it seems, the sound of your own voice.The facts are there for all to see.  Try doing a little bit of research on climate change and you''ll realise that everything you''ve said in your post is absolute balls! This is not political or scare-mongering, this is scientific fact that is now indisputable.  You''re obviously a very close-minded person, but given your very passionate nature I''m shocked you''re happy to see future generations of Cluck live in a dying world.  You obviously don''t understand the issue at hand... Those that know me will know that I''m actually studying this stuff, so I know my onions... I suggest you take a peek at Al Gore''s An Inconvenient Truth, or maybe go to Uni and do my course... or maybe just open your eyes and look at the facts with an objective eye...The issue isn''t about one person, and I''m not picking on Earnie (and I''ve no idea who drives what, I only know because of this article).  I think that anyone with the money and the means to help reduce carbon emissions should do so, and this includes footballers, actors, fat cat bosses and politicians.  I don''t expect the average joe with a large family and a small income to be able to do too much... but when those that can don''t, where will our planet end up?5 Degrees warmer within 100 years is where...I''ll be dead, as will most of us... but I hope your children enjoy the mediterranean climate...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Evil Monkey"]To answer the question about which car I drive... I don''t drive one at all! I don''t even hold a licence!  I cycle or walk most places that I can, and use public transport for most other things (though I am, admittedly, flying to Italy next month but this will be my first flight in 2 years).  I actively recycle, make sure all my electrical points are switched off when not in use and the lights in my Halls are energy saving and motion sensitive.  I''m also thinking of lobbying the Vice Chancellor of my Uni to convert to biological sewage treatment systems, which are cheap and very, very effective.  Little things, and I''ll make very little difference on my own... but if all of us did it...??

So why do I do all this? Because of a "myth"? No, because of the facts.  Sorry, Cluck, but your attitude on this, like on so much else, stinks to high heaven of some kind of bitterness about the whole world! We''re all being lied to about everything and everything is sh*t... except, it seems, the sound of your own voice.

The facts are there for all to see.  Try doing a little bit of research on climate change and you''ll realise that everything you''ve said in your post is absolute balls! This is not political or scare-mongering, this is scientific fact that is now indisputable.  You''re obviously a very close-minded person, but given your very passionate nature I''m shocked you''re happy to see future generations of Cluck live in a dying world.  You obviously don''t understand the issue at hand... Those that know me will know that I''m actually studying this stuff, so I know my onions... I suggest you take a peek at Al Gore''s An Inconvenient Truth, or maybe go to Uni and do my course... or maybe just open your eyes and look at the facts with an objective eye...

The issue isn''t about one person, and I''m not picking on Earnie (and I''ve no idea who drives what, I only know because of this article).  I think that anyone with the money and the means to help reduce carbon emissions should do so, and this includes footballers, actors, fat cat bosses and politicians.  I don''t expect the average joe with a large family and a small income to be able to do too much... but when those that can don''t, where will our planet end up?

5 Degrees warmer within 100 years is where...I''ll be dead, as will most of us... but I hope your children enjoy the mediterranean climate...
[/quote]

Oh dear EM...you have got it bad. No doubt you''ll soon have the pointless wind turbines whizzing on your roof and solar panels which cost far more than they could ever save.

I may agree that it is not appropriate to drive petrol guzzling motors when alternatives are available....but not because of emissions. Oil is a diminishing resource...so it should be preserved where possible....but not at cost to civilisation and human progress.

There is far too much emphasis on the myth that human activity has caused "global warming". No-one is denying it is happening...but it is a natural cycle going back millenia. Back in the "stone-age" this country had a much warmer climate....but by the arrival of the "bronze age" it had cooled considerably and exposed human settlements were abandoned. Various stages followed where the Romans had grape vines as far north as Yorkshire and the medieval period was even warmer....followed by the "mini ice-age" of the 15th to 18th-ish century where the Thames regularly froze over. I could go on but I won''t.........[;)]

It''s pure populist knee jerk based on a principle that seeks to prevent global development (Africa/Asia/South America) in favour of the developed West. Lots of jobs depend on the environmental gravy train now....so it ain''t gonna listen to proper science any time soon which strongly contradicts the myth. Strange how China and India are being strongly criticised for industrial development at this time eh?.....while the oceans alone naturally produce trillions of litres of carbondioxide naturally....not to mention other life on Earth besides humans.

I understand fully what is happening...but as with most things, I have a mind and eyes of my own and never follow the trend for the sake of it. The world is quite safe....and while certain parts may well become uninhabitable in the short term....the cycle will revolve as it always has in the past. Al Gore has based his commercial "movie" on popular environmental fiction...using "models" badly flawed for sensationalist purposes...and it has worked.

But having said all that....will Delia still be in control of events at Carrow Road in 50 years time? Now that really would be a catastrophe!

Just off to pick up some coal in my Hummer to burn off my old sewage solids.............[:)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I''m assuming all of the above is based on years of scientific research... and not just a recent Channel 4 documentary...??You claim to understand what is happening, but if you''d done some real research into the issue you''d know that whilst carbon does indeed accumulate naturally, and that the world has gone through natural periods of warming and cooling, these have all taken place over a period of tens of thousands of years... the rise in temperature and carbon levels in the atmosphere are higher now than they have ever been and this rise has taken place over.... 50 years.Look it up if you don''t believe me, and I''d suggest conducting some real research rather than a quick Google search... but I''m guessing you won''t be doing that... "stuck in your ways" comes to mind...You "understand" nowt in this instance I''m afraid, Cluck... anyone would think you''re the kind of person who''d argue against facts...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, this has naff all to do with football now, yet its in the football section, so lets change the subject, hey?

How absolutely awesome is Martin? :P

im only messing :p

hogeeesarrr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Cluck "]

[quote user="Evil Monkey"]To answer the question about which car I drive... I don''t drive one at all! I don''t even hold a licence!  I cycle or walk most places that I can, and use public transport for most other things (though I am, admittedly, flying to Italy next month but this will be my first flight in 2 years).  I actively recycle, make sure all my electrical points are switched off when not in use and the lights in my Halls are energy saving and motion sensitive.  I''m also thinking of lobbying the Vice Chancellor of my Uni to convert to biological sewage treatment systems, which are cheap and very, very effective.  Little things, and I''ll make very little difference on my own... but if all of us did it...??

So why do I do all this? Because of a "myth"? No, because of the facts.  Sorry, Cluck, but your attitude on this, like on so much else, stinks to high heaven of some kind of bitterness about the whole world! We''re all being lied to about everything and everything is sh*t... except, it seems, the sound of your own voice.

The facts are there for all to see.  Try doing a little bit of research on climate change and you''ll realise that everything you''ve said in your post is absolute balls! This is not political or scare-mongering, this is scientific fact that is now indisputable.  You''re obviously a very close-minded person, but given your very passionate nature I''m shocked you''re happy to see future generations of Cluck live in a dying world.  You obviously don''t understand the issue at hand... Those that know me will know that I''m actually studying this stuff, so I know my onions... I suggest you take a peek at Al Gore''s An Inconvenient Truth, or maybe go to Uni and do my course... or maybe just open your eyes and look at the facts with an objective eye...

The issue isn''t about one person, and I''m not picking on Earnie (and I''ve no idea who drives what, I only know because of this article).  I think that anyone with the money and the means to help reduce carbon emissions should do so, and this includes footballers, actors, fat cat bosses and politicians.  I don''t expect the average joe with a large family and a small income to be able to do too much... but when those that can don''t, where will our planet end up?

5 Degrees warmer within 100 years is where...I''ll be dead, as will most of us... but I hope your children enjoy the mediterranean climate...
[/quote]

Oh dear EM...you have got it bad. No doubt you''ll soon have the pointless wind turbines whizzing on your roof and solar panels which cost far more than they could ever save.

I may agree that it is not appropriate to drive petrol guzzling motors when alternatives are available....but not because of emissions. Oil is a diminishing resource...so it should be preserved where possible....but not at cost to civilisation and human progress.

There is far too much emphasis on the myth that human activity has caused "global warming". No-one is denying it is happening...but it is a natural cycle going back millenia. Back in the "stone-age" this country had a much warmer climate....but by the arrival of the "bronze age" it had cooled considerably and exposed human settlements were abandoned. Various stages followed where the Romans had grape vines as far north as Yorkshire and the medieval period was even warmer....followed by the "mini ice-age" of the 15th to 18th-ish century where the Thames regularly froze over. I could go on but I won''t.........[;)]

It''s pure populist knee jerk based on a principle that seeks to prevent global development (Africa/Asia/South America) in favour of the developed West. Lots of jobs depend on the environmental gravy train now....so it ain''t gonna listen to proper science any time soon which strongly contradicts the myth. Strange how China and India are being strongly criticised for industrial development at this time eh?.....while the oceans alone naturally produce trillions of litres of carbondioxide naturally....not to mention other life on Earth besides humans.

I understand fully what is happening...but as with most things, I have a mind and eyes of my own and never follow the trend for the sake of it. The world is quite safe....and while certain parts may well become uninhabitable in the short term....the cycle will revolve as it always has in the past. Al Gore has based his commercial "movie" on popular environmental fiction...using "models" badly flawed for sensationalist purposes...and it has worked.

But having said all that....will Delia still be in control of events at Carrow Road in 50 years time? Now that really would be a catastrophe!

Just off to pick up some coal in my Hummer to burn off my old sewage solids.............[:)]

[/quote]

Whilst I shudder at the thought of my next line, I also tingle with the excitement of another who understands the global picture.

Cluck, you are spot on there. (oh I''ve said it) Words seldom spoken in these parts but true none the less.

15 years ago, we had the CFC culture where scientists told us that we needed to reduce our output in order to reduce this hole over the North Pole. Well we did that, we used alternatives in aerosoles (similar discriptive of the now champion of eco earth), we found new ways to dispose of refridgerators and freezers along with the design build of new models not containing these nasty air bourne world distructors.

As it turned out, these CFC''s were not the issue at all. Now we talk about ''Carbon Footprint''. How much ''Carbon'' do you contribute to? ect. Thats the latest buzz word coming out of environmental affairs.

Well the truth is that the ozone layer and heat level within our planet, fluctuate over a period of 30 years to a maximum, then reduce again. We as humans reached a level of aknowledgement around 20 years ago when the eco environment was in a state of warming. We were at that stage able to guage the current climate and ongoing effect. In the next 15-20 years, you will see a reduction in ozone area and a reduction in overall planet temperature.

I drive a Prius BTW so Im doing my bit apparently. Well actually it just saves me money on fuel and I live in London.I work for a vehicle manufaturer, (youprobably know who by now) who are the leaders in eco technology both in vehicle line up and also manufacturing/administration. If Earnie wants a posh car that offers him an eco friendly ''footprint'' then he need look no further that our RX 400h

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

carbon footprint, the latest way of raising tax based on PC principles of thou shalt not argue against it or you are a heathen.

The world is warming up, its a cycle that has always been. personally I would like to see more measurable things having our taxes spent on such as the crumbling cliffs around our coast. Isn''t this caused by the environment vs. our lack of spending on updating Victorian sea defences?

Back to football.......................

based on your beliefs EM I assume that you are totally against football in the evenings and starting at 3.00 in the winter as the floodlights are used?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Yellow Rages"][quote user="Cluck "]

[quote user="Evil Monkey"]To answer the question about which car I drive... I don''t drive one at all! I don''t even hold a licence!  I cycle or walk most places that I can, and use public transport for most other things (though I am, admittedly, flying to Italy next month but this will be my first flight in 2 years).  I actively recycle, make sure all my electrical points are switched off when not in use and the lights in my Halls are energy saving and motion sensitive.  I''m also thinking of lobbying the Vice Chancellor of my Uni to convert to biological sewage treatment systems, which are cheap and very, very effective.  Little things, and I''ll make very little difference on my own... but if all of us did it...??

So why do I do all this? Because of a "myth"? No, because of the facts.  Sorry, Cluck, but your attitude on this, like on so much else, stinks to high heaven of some kind of bitterness about the whole world! We''re all being lied to about everything and everything is sh*t... except, it seems, the sound of your own voice.

The facts are there for all to see.  Try doing a little bit of research on climate change and you''ll realise that everything you''ve said in your post is absolute balls! This is not political or scare-mongering, this is scientific fact that is now indisputable.  You''re obviously a very close-minded person, but given your very passionate nature I''m shocked you''re happy to see future generations of Cluck live in a dying world.  You obviously don''t understand the issue at hand... Those that know me will know that I''m actually studying this stuff, so I know my onions... I suggest you take a peek at Al Gore''s An Inconvenient Truth, or maybe go to Uni and do my course... or maybe just open your eyes and look at the facts with an objective eye...

The issue isn''t about one person, and I''m not picking on Earnie (and I''ve no idea who drives what, I only know because of this article).  I think that anyone with the money and the means to help reduce carbon emissions should do so, and this includes footballers, actors, fat cat bosses and politicians.  I don''t expect the average joe with a large family and a small income to be able to do too much... but when those that can don''t, where will our planet end up?

5 Degrees warmer within 100 years is where...I''ll be dead, as will most of us... but I hope your children enjoy the mediterranean climate...
[/quote]

Oh dear EM...you have got it bad. No doubt you''ll soon have the pointless wind turbines whizzing on your roof and solar panels which cost far more than they could ever save.

I may agree that it is not appropriate to drive petrol guzzling motors when alternatives are available....but not because of emissions. Oil is a diminishing resource...so it should be preserved where possible....but not at cost to civilisation and human progress.

There is far too much emphasis on the myth that human activity has caused "global warming". No-one is denying it is happening...but it is a natural cycle going back millenia. Back in the "stone-age" this country had a much warmer climate....but by the arrival of the "bronze age" it had cooled considerably and exposed human settlements were abandoned. Various stages followed where the Romans had grape vines as far north as Yorkshire and the medieval period was even warmer....followed by the "mini ice-age" of the 15th to 18th-ish century where the Thames regularly froze over. I could go on but I won''t.........[;)]

It''s pure populist knee jerk based on a principle that seeks to prevent global development (Africa/Asia/South America) in favour of the developed West. Lots of jobs depend on the environmental gravy train now....so it ain''t gonna listen to proper science any time soon which strongly contradicts the myth. Strange how China and India are being strongly criticised for industrial development at this time eh?.....while the oceans alone naturally produce trillions of litres of carbondioxide naturally....not to mention other life on Earth besides humans.

I understand fully what is happening...but as with most things, I have a mind and eyes of my own and never follow the trend for the sake of it. The world is quite safe....and while certain parts may well become uninhabitable in the short term....the cycle will revolve as it always has in the past. Al Gore has based his commercial "movie" on popular environmental fiction...using "models" badly flawed for sensationalist purposes...and it has worked.

But having said all that....will Delia still be in control of events at Carrow Road in 50 years time? Now that really would be a catastrophe!

Just off to pick up some coal in my Hummer to burn off my old sewage solids.............[:)]

[/quote]

Whilst I shudder at the thought of my next line, I also tingle with the excitement of another who understands the global picture.

Cluck, you are spot on there. (oh I''ve said it) Words seldom spoken in these parts but true none the less.

15 years ago, we had the CFC culture where scientists told us that we needed to reduce our output in order to reduce this hole over the North Pole. Well we did that, we used alternatives in aerosoles (similar discriptive of the now champion of eco earth), we found new ways to dispose of refridgerators and freezers along with the design build of new models not containing these nasty air bourne world distructors.

As it turned out, these CFC''s were not the issue at all. Now we talk about ''Carbon Footprint''. How much ''Carbon'' do you contribute to? ect. Thats the latest buzz word coming out of environmental affairs.

Well the truth is that the ozone layer and heat level within our planet, fluctuate over a period of 30 years to a maximum, then reduce again. We as humans reached a level of aknowledgement around 20 years ago when the eco environment was in a state of warming. We were at that stage able to guage the current climate and ongoing effect. In the next 15-20 years, you will see a reduction in ozone area and a reduction in overall planet temperature.

I drive a Prius BTW so Im doing my bit apparently. Well actually it just saves me money on fuel and I live in London.I work for a vehicle manufaturer, (youprobably know who by now) who are the leaders in eco technology both in vehicle line up and also manufacturing/administration. If Earnie wants a posh car that offers him an eco friendly ''footprint'' then he need look no further that our RX 400h

 

 

[/quote]

Well, so common sense can prevail then.  I''m with cluck and YR on this one - while we should all be environmentally conscious, all the latest hype about it is merely to hide another agenda, IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting thread, and a subject that is clearly of great importance. I''m not in the least bit surprised that a well paid footballer decides to drive such an unethical vehicle and it was depressingly obvious when I first looked at this site this morning what Cluck''s opinion on this would be! Unfortunately I had only predicted a rant about ''political correctness'' and missed out the bits about ''displaced lefties and commies''! I wasn''t aware that the myth of global warming had been invented to give me something else to moan about since the demise of the Soviet Union, but thanks for the heads up Cluck.

I don''t think anybody is denying that carbon does accumulate naturally, the point is that in the past changes in the earths temperature have happened over tens of thousands of years as EM points out, not a period of fifty years as is the case now. Can you come up with a reason for this Cluck as it''s beyond me as the leftie, commie, pinko that I am!

I particulary like the way that Cluck decides to stick up for developing countries in his little rant. So he takes down the lefties and the liberals one minute but makes sure he reveals his caring, sharing side the next. All things to all men our Cluck, just like certain politicians!

Anyway, do we know if Earnie is maybe offsetting his carbon emissions? Perhaps now that the club is attempting to go green, they will have encouraged him to do this?

The main worry for me is that although the government and big business in this country are making lots of noise about green issues, how much is actually being done? Take the latest green tax on flights as an example. This is doing nothing to cut down carbon emissions because the same amount of people are still flying, they''re just paying more for the privelege. Is this money being ploughed back into ''green initiatives'' or it it just raising money for the government to use in other areas?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cow farts emit  200 million tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere  ( per annum ) 

Globally , all farm animals  emit 40% of all Methane   into the atmosphere .

Animal manure  emits  3 billion tonnes  of Nitrous Oxide into the atmosphere  ....muhahahaha.

A large volcano eruption  emits more  crap into the atmosphere  than 200 years of industrial revolution  ! 

I will leave it to EM to work  out what this means in  total CO2 ... arter all he`s uni  LOL

EM , your dons aint gods !    time and time again  " scientists " have been found out  for the prats they actually are  !   they fall over their arses  blowing off about their  latest theories  { which they hope to get gov grants for , so living the good life at the taxpayers expense )  , and when their theories goes tits up  , what do we get ?   deeeeeep silence   and cover ups  is what !

Remember bird flu ?     remember  " scientists "  advising the government  that  a pandemic and mass deaths   is in the offing ?   we`re all dooooooooomed   ...... whole towns  isolated  , orders given to shoot people trying to get out ,  the drug manufacturers  gleefully making big bucks,   making a vaccine about as useful as two aspirins !    ........ hark at the deeeeep silence  from these " scientists "......  not a bleddy   cheep out of `em  !! 

Cluck  has it right ,  the politicians have hijacked  the word green  , so have the food manufacturers ,  never mind the truth ..... feel the profit   !    EM , your at uni , look up  Aspartame  ,  there`s kids out there that  are  guzzling gallons of crap containing this brain damaging  chemical " sweetener " .... surely more worthy of your  attention than some  semi mythical   global warming ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Canary02"]

I''m just disappointed because the title of the thread promised so much more...

[/quote]

Oh dear CO2....Maybe we can all talk about the player''s haircuts in another thread eh?  Real life is far more interesting than fiction I find.       [;)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Evil Monkey"]I''m assuming all of the above is based on years of scientific research... and not just a recent Channel 4 documentary...??

You claim to understand what is happening, but if you''d done some real research into the issue you''d know that whilst carbon does indeed accumulate naturally, and that the world has gone through natural periods of warming and cooling, these have all taken place over a period of tens of thousands of years... the rise in temperature and carbon levels in the atmosphere are higher now than they have ever been and this rise has taken place over.... 50 years.

Look it up if you don''t believe me, and I''d suggest conducting some real research rather than a quick Google search... but I''m guessing you won''t be doing that... "stuck in your ways" comes to mind...

You "understand" nowt in this instance I''m afraid, Cluck... anyone would think you''re the kind of person who''d argue against facts...
[/quote]

Outside of the microcosm of educational establishments you will find that life experience is the best university of all. A place where you can form your own opinion of events....rather than those preached at you by lecturers with an agenda of their own....and an eye to league tables of pass rates. School taught me very little...mistakes however taught me everything I know. Maybe you will come to agree with me one day.

Very patronising aside regarding the television documentary mentioned....and as I was elsewhere at the time...no, it has not influenced my thinking one jot. Environmental issues are the latest craze....and a gravy train for universities and companies to jump on. The world is perfectly safe without smart a*ses peddling more and more gloom about the future to protect their own interests....and as for "Googling....I''ll leave that to those who need to rely on another person''s opinion rather than their own.

I enjoy a coal fire...and I drive a car which is economical on fuel for the benefit of my wallet only. Carbon neutral my a*rse....it''s all just another con to fool the masses....and fool it, it has!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Cluck "][quote user="Canary02"]

I''m just disappointed because the title of the thread promised so much more...

[/quote]

Oh dear CO2....Maybe we can all talk about the player''s haircuts in another thread eh?  Real life is far more interesting than fiction I find.       [;)]

[/quote]

Don''t refer to me as CO2 or I''ll be outlawed as a pollutant and a danger to cows or somesuch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Cluck "]

Outside of the microcosm of educational establishments you will find that life experience is the best university of all. A place where you can form your own opinion of events....rather than those preached at you by lecturers with an agenda of their own....and an eye to league tables of pass rates. School taught me very little...mistakes however taught me everything I know. Maybe you will come to agree with me one day.

[/quote]

Patronising nonsense as usual Cluck. You only needed to mention the ''School of hard knocks'' and the ''University of life'' in order to make it that little bit more condescending.

May I ask how you''ve formed your opinions on this subject Cluck as you''re so opposed to ''Googling'' and relying on other people''s opinions. Were you born with a fully formed opinion on the fluctuation of the Earth''s temperature and it''s causes? Or is it just something you heard down the pub from the local bore who sits there all day complaining about how ''This country''s going to the dogs''?

The fact is that neither you, me or EM are completely sure about how the effects of global warming will affect us in the future or what we can do to stop it. However, I''m more likely to beleive the theories of scientists or people who are studying the issue rather than somebody who is relying purely on ''life experiences''.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recycling is all well and good but the damages has been done im afraid.. being "kind" to the environment is going to make little difference now.

the atmosphere has had a battering since the industrial revolution... and possibly longer. enjoy it whilst we are all still alive, and when we are dead.. who cares! we certainly wont be grumbling about the heat will we?

jas :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Shack Attack"][quote user="Cluck "]

Outside of the microcosm of educational establishments you will find that life experience is the best university of all. A place where you can form your own opinion of events....rather than those preached at you by lecturers with an agenda of their own....and an eye to league tables of pass rates. School taught me very little...mistakes however taught me everything I know. Maybe you will come to agree with me one day.

[/quote]

Patronising nonsense as usual Cluck. You only needed to mention the ''School of hard knocks'' and the ''University of life'' in order to make it that little bit more condescending.

May I ask how you''ve formed your opinions on this subject Cluck as you''re so opposed to ''Googling'' and relying on other people''s opinions. Were you born with a fully formed opinion on the fluctuation of the Earth''s temperature and it''s causes? Or is it just something you heard down the pub from the local bore who sits there all day complaining about how ''This country''s going to the dogs''?

The fact is that neither you, me or EM are completely sure about how the effects of global warming will affect us in the future or what we can do to stop it. However, I''m more likely to beleive the theories of scientists or people who are studying the issue rather than somebody who is relying purely on ''life experiences''.

[/quote]

Yes, me too Shack, hence why I don''t fall for the current global warming craze.  Some of what has been said is undeniably true - the temperature rise has been quite quick compared to historical evidence - however, it still stands that the majority of this current temperature rise happened prior to the second world war and that the increase in CO2 is more a result of global warming rather than the other way round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I certainly can''t argue with your stats there, Sheded, as I really don''t know which reports on the subject to believe. However, I can''t help but wonder why you credit the research on Aspartame with any more credibility than the research on CO2 or Bird Flu?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cluck, Mistakes have taught you every thing you know?  That would explain why you are very good at making them.

I don''t know what you think goes on at university exactly, but all the

students I know form their own opinions of events, and I have not had

any political point preached at me by any lecturer in 5 years. In that

time people from outside of universities (businessmen and politicians)

have preached biased political viewpoints at me however.

On the CFCs, they act on ozone (O3) as free radicals which catalyse the

decomposition of ozone into oxygen. Crucially they are not used up in

this process, but they do decompose after about 25 years. (Its in

Chemistry A-Level)

CO2 levels do warm the planet, compare with Venus and Mars which are

hotter and colder respectively that should be expected from their

distance to the sun, Ice cores from the antarctic also provide

historical evindence for global temperatures and CO2 levels.

There is some evidence against global warming, and unlike Evil Monkey

there is some dissent among the scientific comunity.  Those

directly funded by Exxon-Mobile claim it doesn''t exist and use the same

arguements as Cluck does.  Both sides exagerate their claims and

there is no Left-wing media bias, especially not when most of it is

owned by Rupert Murdoch.

Another thing if life experience were the best university then

graduates (especially in sciences/engineering/law/medicine/languages)

wouldn''t get the best salaries, and 50 year olds wouldn''t find it

really hard to get a job if made redundent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Canary02"][quote user="Cluck "][quote user="Canary02"]

I''m just disappointed because the title of the thread promised so much more...

[/quote]

Oh dear CO2....Maybe we can all talk about the player''s haircuts in another thread eh?  Real life is far more interesting than fiction I find.       [;)]

[/quote]

Don''t refer to me as CO2 or I''ll be outlawed as a pollutant and a danger to cows or somesuch.

[/quote]

As is often the case with you Canary02....a wonderful response....and the reason why I like you so much!   [:)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
there is a wide spread of opinion on this subject, and that''s how it should be.  however, its surely unreasonable to dispute the current scientific thinking on the man-made causes of climate change, given the volume of overwhelming evidence now in circulation.  to fly in the face of such considered argument must be irrational at best, and at worst, negligent.  even if you don''t agree, if you cared about the planet and humanity, wouldn''t you decide rationally to hedge your bets and change your behaviour to reduce your carbon footprint??therefore,  from reason,  i can only assume fellow human beings who refuse to accept the scientific facts on climate change and/or modify their behaviour accordingly, do so from an irrational and uncaring point of view. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Evil Monkey"]According to the Pinkun this morning, Earnie drives a two meter high Hummer around the streets of Norwich...

He''s about 2 feet tall, does he really need such a large vehicle? And think of the environmental impact on our fair City, all at a time when the club is attempting to go green... maybe they should sort their playing staff out!

Or maybe he''s just compensating by having such a large car... [:#]

[/quote]

Earnie has been driving around in a Hummer for over a year so it`s strange that the press have only just spotted him. He is hard to see behind the wheel, so perhaps thats why they have missed him. In fact I believe he finds it very hard to see over the wheel and has bumped it once or twice.The theory presumably is if you are so small that you go around bumping into other vehicles you might as well drive a tank. Lets face it we wouldnt want him getting injured on the road as well as on the pitch. I see it as NCFC protecting a precious little asset, so well done to the Board for some lateral thinking.

Can our learned uni types please explain the why CO2 emissions lag behind historic global temperature rises if they are the cause? 

Also, do the abundant funding oppertunities for scientific research into man induced global warming tend to result in a distorted picture being formed? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="7rew"]Cluck, Mistakes have taught you every thing you know?  That would explain why you are very good at making them.

I don''t know what you think goes on at university exactly, but all the students I know form their own opinions of events, and I have not had any political point preached at me by any lecturer in 5 years. In that time people from outside of universities (businessmen and politicians) have preached biased political viewpoints at me however.

On the CFCs, they act on ozone (O3) as free radicals which catalyse the decomposition of ozone into oxygen. Crucially they are not used up in this process, but they do decompose after about 25 years. (Its in Chemistry A-Level)

CO2 levels do warm the planet, compare with Venus and Mars which are hotter and colder respectively that should be expected from their distance to the sun, Ice cores from the antarctic also provide historical evindence for global temperatures and CO2 levels.

There is some evidence against global warming, and unlike Evil Monkey there is some dissent among the scientific comunity.  Those directly funded by Exxon-Mobile claim it doesn''t exist and use the same arguements as Cluck does.  Both sides exagerate their claims and there is no Left-wing media bias, especially not when most of it is owned by Rupert Murdoch.

Another thing if life experience were the best university then graduates (especially in sciences/engineering/law/medicine/languages) wouldn''t get the best salaries, and 50 year olds wouldn''t find it really hard to get a job if made redundent.
[/quote]

I''ve also learned not to take things too much to heart.  More of the same blather put about by the environmental do-gooders out to control the thinking of the common man I''m afraid.. There is always room for a variety of theories on serious issues such as this....that way individuals can form their own opinions based on the conflicting evidence available, often contrary to the diatribe spouted out by well meaning (and overpaid) university lecturers who feel they must dictate society''s thoughts.

Good for you for standing up for your education...but for me it is just a series of text book exercises based on an individual''s theorising. In my view a university degree literally means nothing other than a channelled vision implanted by the educational curriculum of the day.  Give me someone with "common sense" any day...because a whole lifetime of study can''t give you that.....It''s a gift that no number of bits of paper can create.

Finally...isn''t CO2 a bi-product of warming...not the cause? The warmer the seas...the more emissions there are of CO2. What warms the seas?....surely the sun. What reduces warming? Clouds and the water particles therein...bound together by pollutants such as carbon.  Why when the industrial revolution was in full swing and filthy chimneys around the world spewed smoke skywards didn''t "human assisted global warming" peak then?  Maybe because it is not factual....and simply a gravy train for for the activists to jump on.

Shall we discuss Trident next?      [;)]

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="7rew"]Cluck, Mistakes have taught you every thing you know?  That would explain why you are very good at making them.

I don''t know what you think goes on at university exactly, but all the students I know form their own opinions of events, and I have not had any political point preached at me by any lecturer in 5 years. In that time people from outside of universities (businessmen and politicians) have preached biased political viewpoints at me however.

On the CFCs, they act on ozone (O3) as free radicals which catalyse the decomposition of ozone into oxygen. Crucially they are not used up in this process, but they do decompose after about 25 years. (Its in Chemistry A-Level)

CO2 levels do warm the planet, compare with Venus and Mars which are hotter and colder respectively that should be expected from their distance to the sun, Ice cores from the antarctic also provide historical evindence for global temperatures and CO2 levels.

There is some evidence against global warming, and unlike Evil Monkey there is some dissent among the scientific comunity.  Those directly funded by Exxon-Mobile claim it doesn''t exist and use the same arguements as Cluck does.  Both sides exagerate their claims and there is no Left-wing media bias, especially not when most of it is owned by Rupert Murdoch.

Another thing if life experience were the best university then graduates (especially in sciences/engineering/law/medicine/languages) wouldn''t get the best salaries, and 50 year olds wouldn''t find it really hard to get a job if made redundent.
[/quote]

Some interesting points 7rew and a quick Google search (I know Cluck, I just can''t think for myself!) on Exxon-Mobile throws up the following.

"Oil giant ExxonMobil has for years been the world’s most controversial oil firm for its opposition to the Kyoto Protocol and its role in convincing the US government to abstain from effective measures to combat climate change. Despite growing pressure, the company continues to fuel the work of climate sceptic think tanks and lobby groups in North America and Europe. Last year ExxonMobil distributed $2,9 million to 39 such groups. The Competitive Enterprise Institute, a Washington think tank that aggressively challenges the need to act against global warming, was the biggest US beneficiary of ExxonMobil funding last year.

In Europe, ExxonMobil has funded virulent opponents of EU efforts to combat climate change such as the International Policy Network, the Centre for The New Europe, Tech Central Station and the International Council for Capital Formation – the latter three based in Brussels. In 2005, ExxonMobil funded the climate change programmes of Centre for The New Europe and the International Policy Network for $50,000 and $130,000 respectively. With these expenses ExxonMobil wants to create an environment where climate scepticism appears to come from respectable sources, whereas in reality the climate skeptics are paid by a vested interest to pollute the climate debate with non-scientific arguments.

Earlier this year, the Royal Society, the UK’s most prestigious scientific body, wrote to the oil giant to demand that it withdraws its funding for these groups because they have “misrepresented the science of climate change by outright denial of the evidence”. This demand was echoed in an open letter sent to ExxonMobil in October by two United States senators. The senators, one Republican and one Democrat, called upon the company to show corporate responsibility and “end any further financial assistance” to groups “whose public advocacy has contributed to the small but unfortunately effective climate change denial myth.”".

Now Cluck may like us to believe that climate change is a harmless myth cooked up by displaced lefties and commies, but if it was would one of the largest oil companies in the world be spending so much money trying to discredit it with non-scientific arguments?

Getting back on topic, if ExxonMobil are refusing to accept any responsibility for climate change and are unwilling to help combat it, what difference will it make if a 2nd Division footballer from the English league swaps his Hummer for a bicycle?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Lincoln Canary"]

I certainly can''t argue with your stats there, Sheded, as I really don''t know which reports on the subject to believe. However, I can''t help but wonder why you credit the research on Aspartame with any more credibility than the research on CO2 or Bird Flu?

[/quote]

OK ,  

1,  CO2  , aka global warming ,  NO  " scientist "   can predict with  ANY  certainty  , what the causes of global warming  IS !   in a few words  , they are guessing !    and your guess is as good as mine  ......    the worrying part of all this  , is that  we are being jerked around by these scientist twats !   hardly a week goes by  but one of these nerks  comes up with yet another  goddam reason why we shouldn`t do this , that , or the other !   and it gets aired in the media ... gimme strength  .

2,  Bird flu ?    was it 3 years ago  that the government  issued a warning of impending doom ?  yus !    and we have had a dead swan in Scotland  ,  and an outbreak among turkeys in  east anglia  , caused by dodgy  husbandry , factory " farming  "   and importing infected   carcasses from Hungary  ......   hope your having a nice holiday in Spain Mathews ? anybody eating your products  needs  brain surgery ! 

3,  Aspartame ?  now THIS  product   IS  well researched !    the food " industry "  use it because its cost effective  , the " scientists " who approve it  are in their  pockets ,  its a known carcinogen ,  a known  cause of brain disorders  , etc etc etc   , but google up  Aspartame  , and form your own conclusions !   think you`ll find it disturbing .....  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting to see so many opinions, and I''m not going to try any further to "preach to the masses" as it were, because it is obviously very useless and I don''t have the facilities to post some of the most recent charts showing carbon levels vs global temperature over the last 50 000 years or so.  I also don''t believe that human''s have the mental capacity to comprehend such a massive global issue, in a world where the best we can do for global issues are immigration and terrorism, something which affects very few countries (relatively).  However, I find it disappointing that so many on here are so sceptical about the whole situation, when any idiot could conduct a little bit of research and find that the science is no longer in dispute, except from privately-funded organisations, such as Exxon-Mobile, or Channel 4 documentaries.  But personally, I''ll listen to the respectable scientists with no political agenda and make my own judgements accordingly...As a matter of point, I''m 25 years old and have come to University to study an area of interest to me after 5 and a half years working for the faceless corporation that is our local insurance company.  I''ve had plenty of "hard knocks" in my time, and decided after this time that I would like to further my own understanding on the subject with a University education.  I''ve never seen a politician hanging around the campus saying "hey kid, wanna work for the government" nor have I ever heard of University lecturers having a political agenda.  The two establishments are very often at odds. In fact, there''s an article in this week''s New Scientist in which some British scientists claim that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report from last month claim that it has been significantly "watered down" by the politicians who had the final say on the draft.  Taking out research which strengthens the case for Climate Change doesn''t sound like the acts of a government wishing to scare us all into paying "green taxes".And like most of you, I do believe that politicians are using the climate change as a means to beat each other, as seen with this week''s differing agendas from the three parties.  They''ll use green taxes to sting the pocket of the average joe, and the likelihood of this being ploughed back into projects to alleviate the problems are slim.  Meanwhile big businesses will use "carbon trading" to make shit-load of cash for themselves whilst using it as an excuse to charge the consumer more (see last week''s reports that energy companies have charged customers for the price of carbon trading whilst actually having to spend very little due to a massive price drop).Too many confuse scientists with politicians, and they''re very rarely the same... and too many are confusing the Ozone layer and CFC problem with that of Climate Change, which are very different problems, one of which is slowly going away thanks to government legislation in the late 80s, the other of which is very real and very definitely coming to a home near you... and I must admit I know very little of Sheded''s own bug bear, but that''s mainly because it''s not my area of research.One question I must ask, however, is this:Do you all like the Norfolk Broads? The beauty, the nature, the tourism it brings?  Well, folks, I''m afraid to say that if we do nothing about climate change then our sea levels could rise by more than just a few metres... and can anyone think of a flat area of land surrounded by sea...?Oh, and CO2... I know where you live, and I''m coming to trade your punk ass for some trees...[;)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cluck, contrary to appearances I do agree with you to some extent.  I agree with you opinion of degrees in the social "sciences", those I would take a person with common sense as an employee first.However, I find "hard" science subjects are totally different to this.  Would you want your GP to have common sense or a degree in medicine?From my own subject, mathematics, it gives me several advantages over common sense:A training in logical thought, I can better apreciate what is actually said in a passage and what is mearly implied than I could before I started.A better understanding of probability that is generally gained by experience. some examples:A fair coin comes up:  HHHHH HHHHHA fair coin comes up:  HTHTT  HTTTHWhich is more likely?What will most likely come up next in each sequence?Answer these questions in order (don''t look up the answers)The population of Turkey is higher or lower than 8 million.I estimate the population of Turkey to be:The population of Thailand is higher or lower than 142 millionI estimate the population of Thailand to be:now look up the answer, http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004379.htmlHere are the answers to these (highlight to read):The first answers are neither, both have probability 1 in 1024 and either H or T with 50% probability.  If you said the second and T in the first one, H in the second then you have fallen for the Gamblers Falacy that the probability of T increases after a run of H, it doesn''t.  If  you said H then T because of the pattern then you have mistaken randomness for a determined sequence.For the second, this is the availability error,  both are about 64-70 million, but you probably underestimated Turkey and overestimated Thailand as the first question gives you a subconcious lead as to what the population might be.

My degree also helps with other skills, not least that I have been proved able to learn 4 years worth of mathematics and understand it.The other thing you said was about lecturers being overpaid,  They are paid (eventually) a good wage, but nothing to what they could earn in the comercial sector, often for doing the same sort of work.  The starting salery for comparison is £12,000 p/a for 3yrs for a PhD (which takes 4-4.5 years normally) or £28,000 p/a doing actuarial work with £1,500 pay rise per professional exam passed, or even more in city trading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="jas the barclay king"]

Recycling is all well and good but the damages has been done im afraid.. being "kind" to the environment is going to make little difference now.

the atmosphere has had a battering since the industrial revolution... and possibly longer. enjoy it whilst we are all still alive, and when we are dead.. who cares! we certainly wont be grumbling about the heat will we?

jas :)

[/quote] A lot of damage has been done but it''s not too late to slow down future damage - we have the opportunity to make considerable difference. Saying we''ve gone too far is a myth -  that''s a cop out because people aren''t preapred to change their lifestyle to do much about it! We might not be grumbling about the heat but I don''t personally like the thought of my kids (if I have any) suffering or the thought of Norwich being drowned and lost to rising sea levels irrespective of whether I''m alive to see it or not.

No offence but it''s attitudes like yours that mean little is being done in the world to help and has meant that we have caused far more damage than is necessary and continue to do so!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting to see so many opinions, and I''m not going to try any further to "preach to the masses" as it were, because it is obviously very useless and I don''t have the facilities to post some of the most recent charts showing carbon levels vs global temperature over the last 50 000 years or so.  I also don''t believe that human''s have the mental capacity to comprehend such a massive global issue, in a world where the best we can do for global issues are immigration and terrorism, something which affects very few countries (relatively).  However, I find it disappointing that so many on here are so sceptical about the whole situation, when any idiot could conduct a little bit of research and find that the science is no longer in dispute, except from privately-funded organisations, such as Exxon-Mobile, or Channel 4 documentaries.  But personally, I''ll listen to the respectable scientists with no political agenda and make my own judgements accordingly...

As a matter of point, I''m 25 years old and have come to University to study an area of interest to me after 5 and a half years working for the faceless corporation that is our local insurance company.  I''ve had plenty of "hard knocks" in my time, and decided after this time that I would like to further my own understanding on the subject with a University education.  I''ve never seen a politician hanging around the campus saying "hey kid, wanna work for the government" nor have I ever heard of University lecturers having a political agenda.  The two establishments are very often at odds. In fact, there''s an article in this week''s New Scientist in which some British scientists claim that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report from last month claim that it has been significantly "watered down" by the politicians who had the final say on the draft.  Taking out research which strengthens the case for Climate Change doesn''t sound like the acts of a government wishing to scare us all into paying "green taxes".

And like most of you, I do believe that politicians are using the climate change as a means to beat each other, as seen with this week''s differing agendas from the three parties.  They''ll use green taxes to sting the pocket of the average joe, and the likelihood of this being ploughed back into projects to alleviate the problems are slim.  Meanwhile big businesses will use "carbon trading" to make *-load of cash for themselves whilst using it as an excuse to charge the consumer more (see last week''s reports that energy companies have charged customers for the price of carbon trading whilst actually having to spend very little due to a massive price drop).

Too many confuse scientists with politicians, and they''re very rarely the same... and too many are confusing the Ozone layer and CFC problem with that of Climate Change, which are very different problems, one of which is slowly going away thanks to government legislation in the late 80s, the other of which is very real and very definitely coming to a home near you... and I must admit I know very little of Sheded''s own bug bear, but that''s mainly because it''s not my area of research.

One question I must ask, however, is this:

Do you all like the Norfolk Broads? The beauty, the nature, the tourism it brings?  Well, folks, I''m afraid to say that if we do nothing about climate change then our sea levels could rise by more than just a few metres... and can anyone think of a flat area of land surrounded by sea...?

Oh, and CO2... I know where you live, and I''m coming to trade your punk ass for some trees...Wink [;)]

 

anyway we seemed to go off the subject about earnies hummer a bit...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With all due respect....likelihoods and probabilities don''t equal certainties. Until someone can prove unquestionably that global warming is directly attributal to human activity....I will be forced to form my own conclusions. If I am wrong....and my particular "carbon footprint" is minimal I assure you...I will take notice and act accordingly. Today I hear that Brown is more green than Cameron....Cameron is more green than Brown....while Campbell is desperately trying to get himself heard on the same platform. Do I believe this deceitful bunch will tell me the truth?....not one bit.....and it''s all part of the money spinning "green" circus trying to con the British public into voting for them and so assuring their own political ends.

Global warming is happening...and the comment on the Norfolk Broads above is a valid one...but why is the fully proveable history of variable temperature fluctuation as a natural occurance not the prime explanation? The answer has to be that there is no money to be made out of a "natural" phenomenon....but there is if it twisted to suit the argument where a "cure" is possible. The environmental gravy train is massive for the many employed in the field today....and who in their right mind is going to rock the boat when their whole career depends on it?

I''m concerned for my sons'' future just like anyone else....but I want to hear unequivicable global certainty on the subject before I begin to believe that this is anything other than nature in action. That''s where my common sense element comes in I''m afraid.

I take your point regarding logic and mathematics...but these are only good if the figures you start off with are guaranteed accurate. This isn''t proven with carbon emissions and global warming...so common sense is needed when deciding which theory you choose to take on board based on the current information available......I think    [:)]

 

      

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...