Climate Change

As for Carrington, well the signs are that cycle 25 has started, question is what kind of minimum will it be, will those gamma rays gain enough strength to see off earths magnetosphere allowing a coronal mass ejection to do its worst? Your prediction could be true, we heard it here first folks, ring the Ben's bells for gawds sake guv'nor.

Not my prediction, honest. Boring scientists (them again, whadda they know???!!!) have been muttering about this for a loooong time but it's only since the world went digital that we got really deep into excrement/fan territory. And as for "doing its worst" - alas, it hardly has to get out of bed to fuck up most of present day technology.

...and btw: Free Toilets + RyanAir + Snow in Benidorm!!!! Why didn't you tell me this sooner? I've just passed a snow-free sojourn in Aquitaine, courtesy of EasyJet - Actually, rewind a bit there: Not courtesy; rather more off-hand discourtesy with the odd bit of humiliation and downright rudeness. I shall pray to the Supreme Being that when She decides that the time is ripe for Carrington that she zap the discount airlines first of all....take the train Sig, the end is getting nigher all the time.

PS: "Carrington VC" starring David Niven
 
The world;s richest will be tackling Trump on climate change today in Davos.
 
The world;s richest will be tackling Trump on climate change today in Davos.

How rich is thunderburger? A new Davos recruit joining the elites, hmmm, highly suspicious. At least Trump has some common sense in this global warming debacle. Why did she travel to Davos when she could have presented via internet link, which option has the largest carbon footprint?

For decades Davos has been the enemy of the anti-capitalists (AKA Extinction Rebellion), now the head of the snake is invited in to spit venom, for what reason? Is.there.possibly.money.involved or is it because Trump (and world's media) is present and needs to get onboard for the money train to start rolling?

BBC call her a schoolgirl, slight misnomer, she hasn't been to school for about 5 years!
 
Greta Thunberg gets as much attention from me to what she says as any other intelligent 17-year old. Which is none whatsoever.

She seems obsessed with air travel CO2 emissions. Which demonstrates a lack of knowledge and perspective even of her chosen specialist subject.
 
Although one has great sympathy for those in Ozz that have lost their homes etc. It is entirely their ( officialdom's ) own fault.
The aborigines knew better than let the scrub get bigger every year by having annual burn offs. Having let the scrub grow so big that when it does catch fire it is almost impossible to control safely.
 
Greta Thunberg gets as much attention from me to what she says as any other intelligent 17-year old. Which is none whatsoever.

She seems obsessed with air travel CO2 emissions. Which demonstrates a lack of knowledge and perspective even of her chosen specialist subject.

No, no, Tomo. I followed a car yesterday with a bumper stick that read “Employ teenagers - they’re always right!!”
 
Although one has great sympathy for those in Ozz that have lost their homes etc. It is entirely their ( officialdom's ) own fault.
The aborigines knew better than let the scrub get bigger every year by having annual burn offs. Having let the scrub grow so big that when it does catch fire it is almost impossible to control safely.

I agree, you only need to see the news today to see the former PM Malcolm Turnbull claiming Trump is a climate denier (I don't know if Trump is or isn't TBH, but if the elitist narrative is questioned ie CO2 and caused by human activity, then it's an automatic climate denier label).

The question is, is Turnbull covering his own arse for implementing no scrub burning policies based on pressure from the climate change lobby, or is it to maintain the climate change pressure by using any excuse that appears to fit the narrative. My guess would be alot of both, meanwhile the 'truth' concerning climate change remains unchallenged.

Note also there is no mention of the arsonists from Turnbull, arson appears to be scrubbed from any conversation regarding the Oz bushfires when the climate lobby are involved.

The public ain't buying it.
 
Trump v Thunderberg.

People are never gonna vote to put themselves on the scrap heap so Trump wins.

 
"The Old Groper" - isn't that a Wetherspoon's now?

On a subject more germane: seeing as wot there seems to be considerable support for the view that a) Global Warming wasn't us guvner, honest, and b) that there's sfa we can do about it, I'm curious as to what said support thinks we should do now - if anything.

Do we just wait to disappear under the waves? Are we better off without those irritating counties up north, like Yorkshire? Maybe coastal erosion is a blessing in disguise.

As I've already said, my strategy is to move to higher ground - what are the rest of you planning?
 
"The Old Groper" - isn't that a Wetherspoon's now?

On a subject more germane: seeing as wot there seems to be considerable support for the view that a) Global Warming wasn't us guvner, honest, and b) that there's sfa we can do about it, I'm curious as to what said support thinks we should do now - if anything.

Do we just wait to disappear under the waves? Are we better off without those irritating counties up north, like Yorkshire? Maybe coastal erosion is a blessing in disguise.

As I've already said, my strategy is to move to higher ground - what are the rest of you planning?

Already on higher ground in the North West, in a not too densely populated area, toying with the idea of becoming energy self sufficient by mixing and matching available technologies.
I strenuously object to paying ever inflated prices to the energy industry which I benefit from directly by way of very decent remuneration. :ROFLMAO:

NB Just to clarify "densely populated" is altogether different from "dense population", which most of them are !:p
 
Already on higher ground in the North West, in a not too densely populated area, toying with the idea of becoming energy self sufficient by mixing and matching available technologies.
I strenuously object to paying ever inflated prices to the energy industry which I benefit from directly by way of very decent remuneration. :ROFLMAO:

NB Just to clarify "densely populated" is altogether different from "dense population", which most of them are !:p

So, leaving aside the relative density of the population for the moment**, it would appear that you're taking the not very moral high ground and going for the NIMBY solution. I'm assuming that your backyard is already well above sea-level and irritating flood plains etc? I've just spent a merry fortnight checking out prospective backyards 150+ metres above sea-level....I'm getting in early whilst there's still plenty to go round.

** I can see that this might be a determing factor in the years to come, on the basis that a density of 1 or above would suggest a limited propensity to stay afloat and that generally speaking, even folk in the Northwest aren't much below.
 
Although one has great sympathy for those in Ozz that have lost their homes etc. It is entirely their ( officialdom's ) own fault.
The aborigines knew better than let the scrub get bigger every year by having annual burn offs. Having let the scrub grow so big that when it does catch fire it is almost impossible to control safely.

So lets see now;

Ecosystem evolved to extent that is entirely dependent on fire:
In particular, vegetation-
New growth from buds buried deep under bark, extensive growth underground, seeds require exposure to heat to enable germination, foliage optimized for water conservation, copious production of volatile and flammable compounds, etc etc.

Aboriginal solution: Controlled burning in wet season to best preserve and exploit natural resources.

White Muggers Solution: Ban nasty smelly controlled burning. Introduce invasive species to decimate populations of native beneficial species adapted to local conditions. Ensure ground build up of vast quantities of flammable detritus. Fence off land to prevent escape of wildlife from fires. Populate bush with large numbers of scattered fixed dwellings.

Result. Much wailing and protesting when nature catches up and massive conflagrations of unprecedented infernos rage through the vast swathes of fuel conveniently provided by the new improved land management strategy.

Oh dear, what a surprise !

;)
 
"The Old Groper" - isn't that a Wetherspoon's now?

On a subject more germane: seeing as wot there seems to be considerable support for the view that a) Global Warming wasn't us guvner, honest, and b) that there's sfa we can do about it, I'm curious as to what said support thinks we should do now - if anything.

Do we just wait to disappear under the waves? Are we better off without those irritating counties up north, like Yorkshire? Maybe coastal erosion is a blessing in disguise.

As I've already said, my strategy is to move to higher ground - what are the rest of you planning?

In terms of seeking higher ground, I'm not sure that considering a move to Norfolk applies, they have had miles of sea berm to protect the internal coastline from sea level rises since the Medieval period (well, since the last ice age if you really want the truth) when the peat diggings started flooding. Blakeney point is INCREASING YoY through longshore drift action, no erosion going on there.

Elsewhere where land is falling into the sea along with houses, well that is also a natural process that started 10,000 years ago, now we know that there are areas at risk then common sense prevails not to build, I hope (just as it should for building on flood plains, oh no, but it's climate change causing flooding, not the natural river ebbs and flows flooding the plain and run off from widespread concreting of land to build houses, pah!).

If the UK floods, well, I have a caravan, just hitch-up and go to sunnier, warmer, higher climes, hmmm, Spain, Italy, France, Croatia, Greece........ :D
 
Only a couple of climate hoax news items today:

Loads of manatees are huddling together for warmth as Florida experiences unseasonally COLD conditions, hmmm the global warmists might have a problem explaining this one.


And the BBC heavily promoting the plant-based diet agenda in a bid to reduce the number of animals emitting CO2. OK, in that case, every proponent of reduce meat eating to save the planet should be banned from keeping any pets, dogs, cats, fish, hamsters, you name it, no bueno, they all emit CO2. Otherwise climate hoaxters run the risk of turning their virtuousness into hypocryticalness, yes that includes the royals who have dogs and horses coming out of their ears.

In fact the whole of the UK appears to be overrun with dog ownership over the last 10 years, if I notice a reduction in dog ownership to save the planet in the next couple of years then the majority view on the climate will have changed, otherwise it is just the BBC & MSM promoting minority (and UN) views as per usual.

 
In terms of seeking higher ground, I'm not sure that considering a move to Norfolk applies, they have had miles of sea berm to protect the internal coastline from sea level rises since the Medieval period (well, since the last ice age if you really want the truth) when the peat diggings started flooding. Blakeney point is INCREASING YoY through longshore drift action, no erosion going on there.

Elsewhere where land is falling into the sea along with houses, well that is also a natural process that started 10,000 years ago, now we know that there are areas at risk then common sense prevails not to build, I hope (just as it should for building on flood plains, oh no, but it's climate change causing flooding, not the natural river ebbs and flows flooding the plain and run off from widespread concreting of land to build houses, pah!).

If the UK floods, well, I have a caravan, just hitch-up and go to sunnier, warmer, higher climes, hmmm, Spain, Italy, France, Croatia, Greece........ :D

If you do some cursory research you'll see that current thinking from smart chaps in the biz - i.e erosion buffs in the government (ok, not so smart chaps a million miles from anything that would remotely qualify as "biz") already includes cunning plans to address rising sea-levels and some of these include the abandonment of low-lying areas such as the Fens....and chunks of Norfolk. These areas, and anywhere else that will become somewhat damper in the next century or so, should be designated as indefensible asap...this also includes quite a few quite large cities and a sizable hunk of inner London. I never liked the smoke anyway.

I don't share yr enthusiasm for the caravan but am with you as far as destinations go.
 
If you do some cursory research you'll see that current thinking from smart chaps in the biz - i.e erosion buffs in the government (ok, not so smart chaps a million miles from anything that would remotely qualify as "biz") already includes cunning plans to address rising sea-levels and some of these include the abandonment of low-lying areas such as the Fens....and chunks of Norfolk. These areas, and anywhere else that will become somewhat damper in the next century or so, should be designated as indefensible asap...this also includes quite a few quite large cities and a sizable hunk of inner London. I never liked the smoke anyway.

I don't share yr enthusiasm for the caravan but am with you as far as destinations go.

Of course, the civil service and anyone wishing to earn money from the govt's climate policies will toe the climate change line. Having said that, sea level rises are real and steps to reduce impact on humans by abandonment are sensible.

If we didn't have a caravan, I would have to spend pots of money staying in hotels for short duration with all the restrictions that entails.

Fortunately for me, my adventurous other half has mandated an early retirement, our solution is a touring caravan (expensive continental caravan of course, 15 years of use and still going strong) = freedom to roam for a fraction of the price of hotel living, carrying all our adventure gear around the UK and Europe, until we can no longer do it anymore in old age, just got to scratch out a living for the next couple of years and then retire......🤩

I do worry about the electric car thing though, as long as hybrid tow vehicles are made we'll be safe, otherwise Plan B will have to be enacted (must start thinking of a Plan B).
 
Already on higher ground in the North West, in a not too densely populated area, toying with the idea of becoming energy self sufficient by mixing and matching available technologies.
I strenuously object to paying ever inflated prices to the energy industry which I benefit from directly by way of very decent remuneration. :ROFLMAO:

NB Just to clarify "densely populated" is altogether different from "dense population", which most of them are !:p

There's been never-been-seen-in-our-lifetimes flooding on the highlands of Stockport in recent years, mostly due to the council not clearing the sewerage systems, ignore lazy council lakeys at your peril, luckily the canals can take the extra, unless it's a failing dam.

 
Nice car! :D

gt.jpg
 
Top