Go to Villagebet.com.au for free horse racing tips - Click here now
Forum Home Forum Home > All Sports - Public Forums > Joffs All Sports Bar
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Climate Change - Global Warming..
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Thoroughbred Village Home Page. For village news, follow @TBVillage on Twitter. For horseracing tips, follow @Villagebet on Twitter. To contact the Mayor by email: Click Here.


Climate Change - Global Warming..

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 265266267268269 539>
Author
Message
JudgeHolden View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 16 Apr 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 11727
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JudgeHolden Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Jun 2017 at 10:02am
Originally posted by Tlazolteotl Tlazolteotl wrote:

You present the COTS threat as a complete hoax, they did nothing about, and the threat simply went away- that is the opposite of the truth- complete bullsh*t.

There was and is a big threat from the COTS and they did something about and are still doing something about it. There is a lesson there.



Yep, like ozone depletion. We just waited that b!tch out!
Back to Top
JudgeHolden View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 16 Apr 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 11727
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JudgeHolden Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Jun 2017 at 11:25am
Originally posted by JudgeHolden JudgeHolden wrote:

Climate doesn't move in "cycles", it responds to "forcings". You could argue that orbital forcings (causing ice ages and the like) move in cycles, but these play out over millenia and have nothing to do with what we are currently experiencing:



To clarify. There are also "natural" climate oscillations like El Niño. But no natural phenomena can explain the current interdecadal warming trend.

Maybe someone here can indentify the what the real driver is. Make themselves rich and famous.
Back to Top
max manewer View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 32947
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote max manewer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Jun 2017 at 12:17pm
Scientists could never agree about what caused COTS "infestations", or what the long-term consequences were, or even if all the effects were negative. The idea that "they" did something about it, and thereby effected a solution, is fanciful, sure a few weekend warriors collected starfish from selected locations where tourists gathered, but this was never going to "cleanse" hundreds of thousands of square kilometres of reef. That would be quite impractical. Not quite as impractical, though, as a recent proposal to pump cool deep ocean water on to reefs to prevent coral bleaching.
Back to Top
Dr E View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 05 Feb 2013
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 28563
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dr E Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Jun 2017 at 1:05pm
Did we wipe the COTS out? ... if not, why not? ... we have managed to wipe out plenty of species in the past ... what stopped them from completely destroying the reef the time before the last "disaster"? ... what? ... we don't have the data going back 2,500 years, so we are just guessing? ... AGAIN!!!??? 

... or was it just a CYCLE?

Everything works in a cycle ... there are always peripheral, minor things that mean the cycles are never exactly the same, even humanity can make a minor difference, but not enough to change the natural outcome ... in fact if humanity was not here, that would only cause a ripple to the natural cycle of the planet's evolution.

Get over yourselves people, you're not that important in the scheme of things! 

If anyone wants to tell you anything else, just be wary that they are not being influenced by $cience ...Wink
In reference to every post in the Trump thread ... "There may have been a tiny bit of license taken there" ... Ok, Thanks for the "heads up" PT!
Back to Top
Dr E View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 05 Feb 2013
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 28563
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dr E Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Jun 2017 at 1:09pm
... and if you are not happy calling a cycle a cycle, please feel free to call it an "oscillation".Thumbs Up
In reference to every post in the Trump thread ... "There may have been a tiny bit of license taken there" ... Ok, Thanks for the "heads up" PT!
Back to Top
max manewer View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 32947
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote max manewer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Jun 2017 at 1:15pm
There are still people running around peddling dire warnings about COTS. It has the feel of an "industry", where alarmism will get you prompt attention from media. In reality, if the COTS was the menace it was advertised to be, it would long since have grazed down the GBR. And still no word on what causes it to explode in numbers from time to time.
Back to Top
Go Flash Go View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 08 Mar 2007
Location: Victoria
Status: Offline
Points: 10245
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Go Flash Go Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Jun 2017 at 1:16pm
Is this debate still going on LOL .... some people do manage to keep their heads up their posterior for quite a long time don't they Wink

What was that saying they hung on ... the science is settled ?? without having an inkling of what they were talking about ...

.... anyway this is time wasting as it's always been .... let the dead bury the dead ... now that's a good saying Thumbs Up
Back to Top
max manewer View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 32947
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote max manewer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Jun 2017 at 1:27pm
Well, Flash, I've long suspected that people get a kind of fatigue about dire warnings, when they fail to materialize, they take less notice of the next "cry wolf" event. This has been seriously damaging to the AGW case. An economy of crisis warnings is needed, the COTS scare, e.g., I regard as BS throughout its longish history, it seems no co-incidence to me that it first emerged with the popularization of diving in the early 60's, prior to that they (COTS) were out of sight, and out of mind.
Back to Top
JudgeHolden View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 16 Apr 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 11727
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JudgeHolden Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Jun 2017 at 1:47pm
Well come on then Doc. Don't be shy. Identify the natural mechanism behind the current warming trend. What's driving this "cycle"?

Once you've done that, you can explain why it's that, and not the 35% increase in concentration of the CO2 that's doing it.
Back to Top
max manewer View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 32947
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote max manewer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Jun 2017 at 1:53pm
I remember (vaguely) a news story in the 60's where concerns were raised that oxygen levels in the atmosphere were threatened by human activity. I kid you not. The AGW "wolf" may well come, but it will have been assisted by unnecessary alarmism about other environmental risks, that simply was dead wrong.
Back to Top
maccamax View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 41473
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote maccamax Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Jun 2017 at 1:59pm
Originally posted by JudgeHolden JudgeHolden wrote:

Well come on then Doc. Don't be shy. Identify the natural mechanism behind the current warming trend. What's driving this "cycle"?

Once you've done that, you can explain why it's that, and not the 35% increase in concentration of the CO2 that's doing it.


There's no warming trend at this time in Orange NSW , Canberra ACT ..
-6 degrees overnight.
Maybe it is that it is the winter cycle but I'm having it looked at,
At this stage with great care we can have some improvement around Christmas.
Back to Top
Gay3 View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group


Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Location: Miners Rest
Status: Offline
Points: 51987
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Gay3 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Jul 2017 at 12:23pm

“Earth has Shifted” – Inuit Elders Issue Warning to NASA and the World (Video)


Global Climate Change: The Earth Has Shifted, Say Inuit Elders. A new warning has come to NASA from the Inuits. They are warning that the change in climate is not due to global warming but rather, because of the Earth shifting a bit.
The Inuits are local people that live in the Arctic regions of Canada, the United States and Greenland. They are excellent weather forecasters and so were their ancestors. Presently they are warning NASA that the cause of change in weather, earthquakes etc, are not due to global warming as the world thinks. They also report that…
Waych video on link below:

They state that the earth has shifted or “wobbled”. “Their sky has changed!”

The elders declare that the sun rises at a different position now, not where it used to previously. They also have longer daylight to hunt now, the sun is much higher than earlier, and it gets warmer much quickly. Other elders across the north also confirmed the same thing about the sky changing when interviewed


Wisdom has been chasing me but I've always outrun it!
Back to Top
max manewer View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 32947
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote max manewer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Jul 2017 at 12:27pm
Haha, they must have had a container load of rum float ashore.
Back to Top
scamanda View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 11 Oct 2008
Location: The Manor
Status: Offline
Points: 16246
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote scamanda Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Jul 2017 at 1:42pm
I don't know how the science can be settled when scientists disagree.

The science has never been settled except for the politically motivated.

Those scientist who speak out against the Climate Change driven scientists and politicians are just yelled down like the left does to all other objectors on any other subject of the day.

I started with nothing and still have most of it left
Back to Top
maccamax View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 41473
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote maccamax Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Jul 2017 at 4:07pm
   Aye Scamanda , Scientists will amaze you with some of their findings .
   One interpreted the description ,   ODD ;-
As a number you cant equally divide by 2.

    Flannery did similar for his half a million a year.
Back to Top
Tlazolteotl View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 02 Oct 2012
Location: Elephant Butte
Status: Online
Points: 31400
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tlazolteotl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Jul 2017 at 11:09am
Originally posted by scamanda scamanda wrote:

I don't know how the science can be settled when scientists disagree.

The science has never been settled except for the politically motivated.

Those scientist who speak out against the Climate Change driven scientists and politicians are just yelled down like the left does to all other objectors on any other subject of the day.


"The topic of settled science is a complicated one. You see, science doesn’t deal in proofs (with the exception of mathematical proofs in certain areas of physics). Rather, it deals in probabilities. In other words, it tells us what is most likely true, but it does not tell us what is absolutely true. It is inherently incapable of proving anything with 100% certainty because we are inherently incapable of knowing everything, which means that we always have to acknowledge the possibility that there is some other piece of evidence which eludes us. Another way to think about this is that science tells us what is correct given the current evidence, but it cannot completely eliminate the possibility of unknown evidence. So in the strictest sense, there is no such thing as “settled science.” It is always possible that some new discovery will overturn previous ideas, but, and this is the really important part, that doesn’t give you the right the assume that other evidence is out there. In other words, the fact that something technically might be wrong, doesn’t mean that you can assume it is wrong (that would be logical blunder known as an argument from ignorance fallacy). Many things in science have been so thoroughly tested and so consistently make accurate predictions that it is almost inconceivable that they could be wrong. So even though we cannot be 100% certain that they are correct, we can be 99.9999999% sure, and that is good enough to consider them essentially “settled” (note: the argument that “scientists have been wrong in the past” is flawed for numerous reasons which are explained here)"

https://thelogicofscience.com/2015/08/16/settled-science-part-1-is-science-ever-actually-settled/
Back to Top
Tlazolteotl View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 02 Oct 2012
Location: Elephant Butte
Status: Online
Points: 31400
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tlazolteotl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Jul 2017 at 11:14am
Invariably, someone is going to say either that the publications are all about the money (debunked here) or that it is peer-pressure and it’s just not possible to publish anything that goes against the mainstream view (debunked here). In short, the fundamental problem with these claims is that scientists absolutely love to publish papers that defeat common views. Discoveries like that are what we live for. No one becomes a great scientist by agreeing with everyone else. You become a great scientist by discovering new things and discrediting old ideas. If you actually had solid evidence that climate change wasn’t happening, evolution wasn’t true, etc. you would have just guaranteed yourself a Nobel Prize.Wink

https://thelogicofscience.com/2015/08/16/settled-science-part-1-is-science-ever-actually-settled/


Back to Top
Dr E View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 05 Feb 2013
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 28563
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Dr E Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jul 2017 at 3:09am
Originally posted by JudgeHolden JudgeHolden wrote:

Well come on then Doc. Don't be shy. Identify the natural mechanism behind the current warming trend. What's driving this "cycle"?

Once you've done that, you can explain why it's that, and not the 35% increase in concentration of the CO2 that's doing it.

$orry, I'm not a $cientist, $o I won't $ay ... Wink

You forgot to mention that 97% of scientists agree ... that climate does change ... they don't know why, but they agree it does.
In reference to every post in the Trump thread ... "There may have been a tiny bit of license taken there" ... Ok, Thanks for the "heads up" PT!
Back to Top
JudgeHolden View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 16 Apr 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 11727
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JudgeHolden Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jul 2017 at 10:41am
Yeah, research funding and grant money. Those guys and gals are really hauling it in .
One of the dumber lines of argument, and not surprisingly one favoured by the anti-vaxxers as well.

https://thelogicofscience.com/2015/04/18/follow-the-money-the-finances-of-global-warming-vaccines-and-gmos/
Back to Top
Dr E View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 05 Feb 2013
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 28563
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dr E Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jul 2017 at 4:52pm
Soros
In reference to every post in the Trump thread ... "There may have been a tiny bit of license taken there" ... Ok, Thanks for the "heads up" PT!
Back to Top
Dr E View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 05 Feb 2013
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 28563
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dr E Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jul 2017 at 4:55pm
Ooops! ... I mean $oro$Wink
In reference to every post in the Trump thread ... "There may have been a tiny bit of license taken there" ... Ok, Thanks for the "heads up" PT!
Back to Top
Dr E View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 05 Feb 2013
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 28563
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dr E Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jul 2017 at 5:04pm
Originally posted by JudgeHolden JudgeHolden wrote:

Yeah, research funding and grant money. Those guys and gals are really hauling it in .
One of the dumber lines of argument, and not surprisingly one favoured by the anti-vaxxers as well.

https://thelogicofscience.com/2015/04/18/follow-the-money-the-finances-of-global-warming-vaccines-and-gmos/

This gives your FAKE NEWS piece all the credibility it deserves Judge ...

"Finally, remember that roughly 97% of climatologists, and over 80% of the general scientific community agree that we are causing climate change."

Do they? ... to what degree are we causing it? ... the answer depends on the $ize of the $ub$idy ... LOLLOLLOL
In reference to every post in the Trump thread ... "There may have been a tiny bit of license taken there" ... Ok, Thanks for the "heads up" PT!
Back to Top
JudgeHolden View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 16 Apr 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 11727
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JudgeHolden Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jul 2017 at 5:07pm
Back to Top
JudgeHolden View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 16 Apr 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 11727
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JudgeHolden Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jul 2017 at 5:13pm
Back to Top
Dr E View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 05 Feb 2013
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 28563
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dr E Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jul 2017 at 5:14pm
old money, old news.
In reference to every post in the Trump thread ... "There may have been a tiny bit of license taken there" ... Ok, Thanks for the "heads up" PT!
Back to Top
Dr E View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 05 Feb 2013
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 28563
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dr E Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jul 2017 at 5:24pm
Judge, you know perfectly well that is so much easier to rally the naive, unhinged, tree hugging and virtue signaling hippies to a cause! 

$soro$ would not need to spend 10% of the funds that the old established fossil fuel interests need, to make 100 times as much profit from government subsidies ... the gullible, self loathing, lefty SJW's will do his bidding, for nothing more than a clear conscience, and some legal fees to interrupt as many mining applications as they can, for as long as they can!

What a business model!Thumbs Up
In reference to every post in the Trump thread ... "There may have been a tiny bit of license taken there" ... Ok, Thanks for the "heads up" PT!
Back to Top
JudgeHolden View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 16 Apr 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 11727
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JudgeHolden Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jul 2017 at 5:52pm
Gullible . All that money spent by Big Fossil, and scarcely a published article to show for it. And yet still some fall for it. No need for a "model", their fish jump right on the hook!
Back to Top
Dr E View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 05 Feb 2013
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 28563
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dr E Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jul 2017 at 6:58pm

BTW, can you just remind us what difference it will make to GLOBAL WARMING if Australia stopped producing emissions tomorrow - you know, like if humanity was eradicated from the continent (including aborigines), and all the cows stopped burping and farting?


Oh, that's right, NONE ... and 97% of scientist agree!!! (well 100% actually) 


Clean-coal cheaper option than renewables


The construction of a new high-efficiency, low emissions coal-fired power station, being considered by the Turnbull government, would cost $2.2 billion — considerably less than the $3bn of subsidies handed out to renewable projects each year, a new technical study shows.

With Australians facing further hikes in their electricity and gas bills following moves by ­energy companies over the weekend to increase bills by up to 20 per cent, Malcolm Turnbull is under pressure to deliver relief for households, small businesses and manufacturers.

New analysis, compiled by power and energy sector specialists GHD and Solstice Development Services, reveals it would cost $2.2bn to build a 1000MW ultra-supercritical (USC) coal-power plant and that it would ­deliver the cheapest electricity on the market.

The overall cost of subsidising ­renewable energy generation has nearly doubled since 2011, and the RET continues to be a political headache for the Turnbull government.

It is sticking to the 23.5 per cent target by 2020, despite calls by former prime minister Tony Abbott­, who was ­involved in ­establishing the RET, to freeze it at the current rate of 15 per cent — a move he says would dramatically lower power bills.

COAL21 chief executive Greg Evans, who is also an executive ­director of the Minerals Council, said the report showed that HELE coal plants, which would have “operating lives of several decades­”, were viable and affordable options to replace the ­nation’s ageing coal-fired power stations. “The report confirms that USC coal generation can deliver­ on the priorities of affordability, reliability and low emissions,” he said, adding that coal-fired generation remained the “cheapest and most reliable energy­ source in Australia, available 24 hours a day, every day”.

Mr Evans, whose COAL21 Fund has invested $300 million in low-emission coal technologies since 2006, said the report estim­ated the current construction cost of a modern HELE plant, or USC black-coal station, at $2.2m/MW, or $2.2bn for 1000MW capacity. “It (the report) notes electricity prices paid by manufacturers have doubled in the past decade and that USC coal is able to lower the cost of generation across the Nationa­l Electricity Market, given current wholesale electricity prices.”

The report stipulates that cost comparisons assume that the power plant’s revenue be “underwritten” in the form of a long-term government agreement covering the purchase of the output or ­capacity of the plant.

Industry chiefs and Coalition MPs concerned about the retirement of coal plants in NSW and Victoria have identified opportunities for new investment in coal plants, using low-emissions technology including viable carbon capture and storage options.

With up to 1200 HELE plants being planned or built in Asia, and similar technology anchoring electricity production in Japan and Germany, senior government MPs, including Mr Abbott, have backed investment in coal-fired energy. Mr Turnbull said last month his government remained open to using cleaner-coal technol­ogy to replace existing generators, in what he said would be a “long-term commitment”.

The Turnbull government has asked the Australian Energy Market Operator for advice on how to best ensure “new continuous dispatchable power is provided”.

Resources and Northern Australia Minister Matt Canavan has said cleaner coal-fired power station­s could potentially save up to 30 per cent in carbon emissions, as well as additional savings on ­operational costs. He has predicted the construction of a new coal-fired power plant would take “about three years”.

“They do cost a little bit more to build, but overall they come out at the same cost or cheaper than the older coal-fired power stations that we have right now,” he said.

He said investors in Asia and Australia were interested in selling cleaner-coal technology and some were open to the idea of “owning a station here”.

The government has adopted 49 of the 50 recommendations made in a review led by Chief Scientist Alan Finkel, aimed at deliveri­ng a blueprint for the future­ of the electricity market.

The Finkel report, which did not rule out new coal-fired power plants as being part of the nation’s energy mix, analysed how the government could work to secure energy supply, drive down prices and cut emissions. Dr Finkel’s final recommendation for a Clean Energy Target is expected to return to cabinet over the winter break, and to the partyroom, where conservative MPs have argued­ against new emissions regimes­.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/cleancoal-power-station-cheaper-option-than-renewables-bill/news-story/b42432238b46c17f53f57db08fbb207c

In reference to every post in the Trump thread ... "There may have been a tiny bit of license taken there" ... Ok, Thanks for the "heads up" PT!
Back to Top
maccamax View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 41473
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote maccamax Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Jul 2017 at 12:51am
OHHH how my iggles ached over night .        I had read where my area of birth and first 30 years was -10 in the early hours.
    Global warming wasn't on anyone's mind in that area .   Viagra sales came to a standstill ( everything was stiff and hard ) no water from taps even.
   Then they say decentralise but I can tell you one plus,   Real Estate is most affordable in those areas at this time of the year.
Back to Top
3blindmice View Drop Down
Champion
Champion


Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 18105
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 3blindmice Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Jul 2017 at 12:58am
Originally posted by Dr E Dr E wrote:

Did we wipe the COTS out? ... if not, why not? ... we have managed to wipe out plenty of species in the past ... what stopped them from completely destroying the reef the time before the last "disaster"? ... what? ... we don't have the data going back 2,500 years, so we are just guessing? ... AGAIN!!!??? 

... or was it just a CYCLE?

Everything works in a cycle ... there are always peripheral, minor things that mean the cycles are never exactly the same, even humanity can make a minor difference, but not enough to change the natural outcome ... in fact if humanity was not here, that would only cause a ripple to the natural cycle of the planet's evolution.

Get over yourselves people, you're not that important in the scheme of things! 

If anyone wants to tell you anything else, just be wary that they are not being influenced by $cience ...Wink

The only cycle involved is the rubbish you keep 'pedaling'. What's stopping you from doing some reading about the basics involved in climate science? I'd suggest it's a combination of ego and a blind adherence to ideology.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 265266267268269 539>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.05
Copyright ©2001-2022 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.484 seconds.