Jump to content

InspectorCoarse

Member
  • Posts

    661
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Has he worked with a DOF before ?
  2. A former lead reviewer for the IPCC, Nils-Axel Mörner was head of Geodynamics at Stockholm University until his retirement in 2005. You all need to calm down you're acting like a bunch of hysterics
  3. So no takers then ? Thought as much 😎
  4. https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-the-maldives-aren-t-sinking
  5. From todays Guardian / Toynbee article / comments section : " If you really believe that the planet being a bit hotter is a huge problem, then drastic action is needed and you would support it. So let's start with something really simple. An activity that is not necessary for human survival, that wouldn't impact if it disappeared, international sport. Cancel all international events, the Olympics, World Cup, World championships, anything that involves international travel. These have big carbon footprints and also countries build new stadiums and other infrastructure etc at another huge cost in carbon. Then sort out who can watch sport domestically. Why do we allow fans to travel hundreds of miles to support a particular team? Just issue tickets only to those fans who can prove they live in the local area, this will impact on clubs like Liverpool etc who probably have more fans from outside Liverpool watching any particular home game. But it is swings and roundabouts those fans can watch their local team instead, no fans lost, just redistributed and saving lots of emissions in the process. " Any takers ? 😎
  6. The planet isnt dying , not even a little bit and no amount of people eating burgers is going to kill it
  7. Droughts in Britain ? Maybe something to do with water privatisation ? People making profits instead of investing in the infrastructure
  8. Keep eating lettuce 🤪
  9. This may also impact on players we would be in for come january
  10. Lomborg : " Firstly, we have got to realise that any kind of Net Zero is going to be phenomenally expensive. There is a new Nature study that shows what a 95 per cent reduction in US emissions by 2050 would look like. The cost would be 11.9 per cent of US GDP annually. That equates to about $11,300 per person per year. A survey has shown that a majority of Americans would vote against a climate tax on energy bills worth just $24 – Net Zero is about 500 times that cost. This is simply not sustainable – governments will get voted out if they do it." Ok - who wants to pay that kind of money per year ?
  11. https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/11/02/the-developing-world-has-much-bigger-problems-than-climate-change/
  12. What do you plan to do about it ?
  13. What do you think my argument is ?
  14. Climate scientists . You just dont like their conclusions . You have a closed mind
  15. The climate has always changed . I just dont believe in the apocalypse next tuesday doomsterism promoted by warped green ideologues and the idea we should all make do with less . Its hysterical alarmism . The planet is not dying , billions are not about to die etc .
×
×
  • Create New...