Which camp are you in?

[Dextraneous]

I recently read somewhere (wish I could find the link) that all of human activity over the last 30K years is equivalent to less than 2% of the energy expended by the 1980 St Helen's eruption.

Our arrogance of our global impact is awesome and outrageous.

 

[ladylola]

http://climatecrocks.com/2013/09/27...likely-catholic-cc-extremely-likely-man-made/

 

[Dextraneous]

Yada yada yada

 

[Norcon]

I recently read somewhere (wish I could find the link) that all of human activity over the last 30K years is equivalent to less than 2% of the energy expended by the 1980 St Helen's eruption.

Our arrogance of our global impact is awesome and outrageous.

The energy expended when Mt ST Helens erupted was somewhere in the region of 400 mega tons of tnt.

The Russians exploded a single bomb equalling nearly 60 mega ton which was about the equivalent of all the bombs dropped in WW2.

So that's 25% of Mt st Helens already.

So just add the other atom bomb testing and you are probably there.

Which makes your googling look kinda foolish friendo.

 

[jockscott]

Joe, I've not said the climate isn't changing. What I have said is that I don't believe these climate change scientific lot, that it's all down to mankind (there's the difference)

This report you linked to. I can only surmise that 97% of climate scientists will get their funding next years from governments. The 3% who disagree will be on the dole.

 

[Norcon]

The 3% who disagree will be on the dole

Far from it. They will be employed by the big oil companies and be paid megabucks.

 

[jockscott]

What I would like to know, is the "carbon footprint" created by climate change scientists and government bods/hanger on's when they attend global conferences in exotic locations? In this technological day and age, they should practice what they preach and set up internet conferencing for these things. "Save the planet" they preach, then think nothing of travelling half way around the world on jet planes to attend these events. They then wonder why a hell of a lot of people are sceptical of their research/intentions.
Oh I forgot,, they'd rather attend these conferences in person, rather than sit in their offices, saving the planet. Bloody hypocrites.

 

[securespark]

My blood group is A,I'll be in that one.

Well, I'm O neg, I'll be in that one.

 

[jockscott]

My blood group is A,I'll be in that one.

Well, I'm O neg, I'll be in that one.

Joe's surname must be Stone.

 

[ladylola]

Let's take all the religious people in the country.
A large percentage will be christian, either church of England, catholic or one of the smaller sects such as quakers, mormons etc.
A further percentage will be muslim, jewish, sihk, or hindu.
Added together probably around 95% of the religious population.
Now a small percentage of people have put down on the census forms that their religion is Jedi , so for the argument we'll call that the remaining 5%.
The people who are Jedi can see that human exsistance benifits from spirtualism and the moral guidance that religion and faith brings. They can see that the 95% are blind to the self fulfiling money making maddness of the mainstream religions. Those cathedrals and glittering minoretes need paying for by someone and it's always the congregations that pay, when was the last time you saw a god dip his hand into his pocket?
So the Jedi have " seen the light" and don't go down the same route as the rest of the brainwashed sheep. Result 5% correct and 95% wrong.

 

[joe-90]

Joe, I've not said the climate isn't changing. What I have said is that I don't believe these climate change scientific lot, that it's all down to mankind (there's the difference)

This report you linked to. I can only surmise that 97% of climate scientists will get their funding next years from governments. The 3% who disagree will be on the dole.

Once more your show your ignorance of how the system works. No-one knows what the research will prove until the results are in. It just so happens that nearly all the results so far suggest that it is man-made. So what have you based your findings on? What research have you undertaken? WHY do you insist that climate change ISN'T man-made? Why? Why do you choose to disbelieve one group of scientists but totally agree with all other groups? You are jumping on a bandwagon because you think it sounds clever. Well it doesn't. It makes you look like a conspiracy theory nutter.

 

[EFLImpudence]

From your link -

Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities,and most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position.

They don't KNOW.

 

[joe-90]

So you tell us what YOU know that makes you believe that they are wrong. (he won't)

 

[EFLImpudence]

They're not wrong.

They are admitting they don't know.

They only think it very likely.


It is a quote from your 'conclusive proof'.

 

[joe-90]

I'm asking you what YOU think and WHY you think it. You don't know why you think what you think other than you think it sounds clever. It doesn't. Tell us why you think that the overwhelming probability is wrong. You can't can you ? You are a silly dope that follows the crowd. Bah bah.