An Inconvenient Truth

[Bacon]

if you want to argue we should only be talking about rugby

Sorry, I never said that. I'll leave you to your seious thread then.

[Happy]

ahh this bit threw me

I came on here to talk about rugby, not politics.

out of interest - what are your rugby teams and location?

[Bacon]

I can't tell if that's a post or a smartarse comment, so I'll explain it without being rude for you.

You've managed to confuse my personal posting preference with how you percieve I think the forum should be run.

163 views and only a few serious replies...come on guys.

I was replying to that, offering an opinion why there may not be many replies.


Whom I choose to support is not your business, I would put it in my profile if I wanted people to know more about me.


I am sorry for hijacking this thread, please continue and I'll return to the rugby forums.

[frontrow]

Sounds like you like to antagonise and stir things up a bit, good on you...But this thread isn't here for that purpose, and i feel that some of us can have conversations, (which don't relate to rugby), on here without the need to feel that it upsets people that we are not talking rugby...We all have our own opinions and views, and some of us like a good argument as well, but in this case it probably isn't warranted and i can't see any reason for the continued niggle to continue, so chill out bro and check out the rugby threads...
I am not trying to be a smartarse or anything, i just feel the need to communicate with fellow TWFers on whatever we want to, whenever we want to, thats all...

[The EnForcer]

Cheers lads, that was fun.

Now back to the point. Just in case anybody is not clear on this. This is not political it's about a sustainable future for our kids and they're kids. If you are not interested then that is your right but if you have an ounce of interest then maybe it's time to talk about it. This is not something that will go away and with the current trend world wide it is something that will have some infuence on how you live your life sooner than you think.

[LarryNJ]

I tend to not believe much that comes out of Al Gores mouth. And I'll probably never watch his film. But I did read this about it.

While noted non-scientists such as Al Gore, Bill Clinton, Robert Redford, Ed Begley Jr, and that liberal nutcase friend you have continue to beat the global warming drum, REAL scientists are hardly monolithic in their views of the matter. In fact, a wide variety of REAL experts know better. While the nuts are criticizing the head of the National Hurricane Center for telling the truth about the hurricane cycle, actual scientists who really study these things are telling the truth.
Professor Bob Carter of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, in Australia gives what, for many Canadians, is a surprising assessment: "Gore's circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention."
Carter is one of hundreds of highly qualified non-governmental, non-industry, non-lobby group climate experts who contest the hypothesis that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are causing significant global climate change. "Climate experts" is the operative term here. Why? Because what Gore's "majority of scientists" think is immaterial when only a very small fraction of them actually work in the climate field.
Even among that fraction, many focus their studies on the impacts of climate change; biologists, for example, who study everything from insects to polar bears to poison ivy. "While many are highly skilled researchers, they generally do not have special knowledge about the causes of global climate change," explains former University of Winnipeg climatology professor Dr. Tim Ball. "They usually can tell us only about the effects of changes in the local environment where they conduct their studies."

Appearing before the Commons Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development last year, Carleton University paleoclimatologist Professor Tim Patterson testified, "There is no meaningful correlation between CO2 levels and Earth's temperature over this [geologic] time frame. In fact, when CO2 levels were over ten times higher than they are now, about 450 million years ago, the planet was in the depths of the absolute coldest period in the last half billion years." Patterson asked the committee, "On the basis of this evidence, how could anyone still believe that the recent relatively small increase in CO2 levels would be the major cause of the past century's modest warming?"
There's more. There's a lot more. Of course, to appreciate it, you have to be open to the idea that actual scientists might know more about climate change than dropouts like Al Gore.

That being said my daughter is the founding President of the Woodstown Juniorettes and they started a local chapter of Freecycle and it has been a big success.

New Freecycle Group in Salem County!!
Don't throw good, useable items away in the garbage/landfill,...check out this incredible new resource website ... you can match up with someone who will see your 'trash' as 'treasure'...and help the enviroment at the same time..win-win situation! The Woodstown Juniorettes established this chapter of the international movement and are calling on the community to make it a great success!! Join us, Freecycle today!

Website: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WoodstownNJFreecycleTM/

So we are doing our little part!

[Happy]

I read an article that planes flying into Auckland will glide in to save fuel

[frontrow]

I read that too, there is a lot of info regarding planes floating around at the moment, ways to cut back on emmisions and various ways to counter this, such as less time in holding patterns, streamlining of flight take offs and landings, rate of burn relating to cruise speeds, probably even on best altitude for best burn is almost certain to be debated...All good ideas...

[Burgs]

I read an article that planes flying into Auckland will glide in to save fuel

After they have dumped the excess 100km out to sea....
By mandate Trans Pacific flights leave with enough fuel to fly most of the way back again however they are physically unable to land with that weight so most of it is dumped prior to landing.
The majority is said to vaporize at altitude however it is not the most environmental of approaches!

Larry, that is kind of what I was alluding to back in my original post.
Most of his material has been totally discredited however it doesn't mean the philosophy of trying to make a change is wrong.
Unfortunately most changes are only carried out by Joe Public, amidst a wave of righteous ego plumping, if there is a benefit to his financial situation.
Sadly, it is a rare thing indeed that a person makes a change to more sustainable consumables or utilities if it in fact may cost more in the short to mid term.

[Bacon]

Sounds like you like to antagonise and stir things up a bit, good on you...But this thread isn't here for that purpose, and i feel that some of us can have conversations, (which don't relate to rugby), on here without the need to feel that it upsets people that we are not talking rugby...We all have our own opinions and views, and some of us like a good argument as well, but in this case it probably isn't warranted and i can't see any reason for the continued niggle to continue, so chill out bro and check out the rugby threads...
I am not trying to be a smartarse or anything, i just feel the need to communicate with fellow TWFers on whatever we want to, whenever we want to, thats all...

Are you talking to Happy or myself? All I did was offer an explaination as to why there were so few replies. Your post is probably relevent to the both of us so lesson learnt clearly, I won't be doing that again.

Plus as I already explained, my personal preference of which threads I choose to have a look at doesn't mean I'm stopping others in anyway.

[Burgs]

Let it go.

[Happy]

After they have dumped the excess 100km out to sea....
By mandate Trans Pacific flights leave with enough fuel to fly most of the way back again however they are physically unable to land with that weight so most of it is dumped prior to landing.
The majority is said to vaporize at altitude however it is not the most environmental of approaches!

wow I had no idea that happened.. and no it isn't very enviro friendly is it

[LarryNJ]

Nor did I. I knew they dumped fuel before an emegency landing but never just to be lighter. Sure it evaporates.

[The EnForcer]

Here is an article written before the Al Gore hype and the movie.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2004Dec25.html

Anybody can find articles written by "experts" who are sceptical of the human impact on global warming and visa versa.

And as I said before, it's your choice to believe what you want but the publishing of articles denying the facts are becoming fewer. They will never disappear and I hope they don't as a one sided argument is never healthy.

I used to be highly sceptical of the global warming scare mongerers, as I used to call them, but I have since changed my mind. Something that made me a little more curious about the subject was when I read an article written by an internationally renowned scientist and expert on global warming. The article was well written and basically said that the human impact on global warming was not an issue and was supported by a raft of scientific data. Shortly afterwards it was revealed that this internationally renowned scientist had a very lucrative deal with an international Oil and Gas Company to do this research plus other research he wanted to do. Certainly made me curious……….

[frontrow]

Wonder what the dolphins think about that...It wouldn't all evaporate, no way...Surely the debate regarding airlines will look into this enviromental nightmare, but not before the issue of global warming though, it is sure to take precedence....