aintforever

Where is the evidence for high energy particle streams causing changes in climate. It would be great if true.

I don't think scientists KNOW what change will do on any level, that's why billions is being spent on satellites that measure the thickness of ice and distribution of water around the globe. The effects are potentially catastrophic, but the UK could end up having some positive effects.

If the coalition fails Labour would romp it at the next election IMO, even though they picked the wrong brother he is still a million miles more electable than Gordon Brown. Plus they will have got the Iraq War monkey of their back.

You already are, just like you are hearing all sides to the 'smoking might cause cancer' and "the earth might be round' debate. There is every motivation in the world for scientists to disprove the man made climate change theory. If someone could find conclusive proof that it's not man made they would save the world billions, win a nobel prize and make themselves very very rich.

For someone who enjoys shooting holes in other people's theories you amazing fail to see gaping holes in your own. If climate change is some big socialist conspiracy how come all of the World's major countries have signed up to it? And your very own conservative government are about to blow £27billion on thousands of massive off shore windmills, which if what you say is true, would be the same as taking £27billion and setting fire to it. If it's supposed to be the scientists conning everyone you are assuming all the Worlds top scientific bodies are run by evil, lying socialists. Now we all know the most intelligent people are generally left wing but I think you are pushing the theory a bit far there! It appear to me that the only people refusing to accept what is quite obvious are people like you who value money and greed so much they are prepared to ruin the planet over it.

You make it sound like the opening games were a complete disaster, we played Plymouth of the park in the first half of that game and were unlucky to lose, the only other game we lost was against Premier League Bolton, even that wasn't a bad performance. We beat Bournemouth 2-0 and Bristol Rovers 4-0 away, the only shocking performance was the Orient draw. None of those opening games were close to how bad the 2-0 loss to Brentford was with Adkins' 'fit' side.

There's no way it will get through Parliament, too many nonces on both sides.

******, all he did was try to save the club. Obviously guilty of being naive in business but that tarnishes nothing, it's the people that strung him along that are to blame. You also have to question the administrator, who knew of Leibherr's interest while all the Pinnacle nonsense was going on - why didn't he just sell to Leibherr straight away?

I don't buy the pre-season training theory, Pardew has managed enough football teams to know how to prepare a side for the season. Even if Les Reed thought he pushed them too hard, why are we taking an opinion of a proven failure over a manager who actually has a history of success? There were also rumours at the tail end of last season that proved to be 100% correct. In my opinion Pardew knew he was on borrowed time, hence the lack of motivation and poor start of the season.

There is no denying that scientists are not great at predicting weather, especially a long time in advance - it's not a great deal to do with global warming though as this year is still due to be one of the hottest on record. Our current cold weather is due to the Atlantic high pressure and changes in the jet stream, the world in not colder, just cold air is moving to a different place than usual. If anything we should be more concerned with climate change than before IMO. God knows what it will be like in January when it usually gets really cold.

It totally depends on how much money they are willing to throw at it, I remember when people were debating wether Chelsea could break into the "big three", then there is Man City - a club renowned for being completely sh!t.

I think everyone is a little bit mental.

It is looking like Farage may be proved right about the single currency, possibly more through luck than judgement though. Either way you have to respect him for actually standing for something he believes in unlike the other spineless lot from Labour, Lib Dem, Conservatives etc who just change what they stand for like the wind just to get elected.

I don't agree with his party's policies but you have to admire the way Farage insults Europeans.

Wishing her dead is a bit strong. I was only young when she was in charge but she was quite clearly a c*nt. Probably a necessary c*nt given the mess the country was in but undeniably a c*nt none the less. I can fully understand the attitude of people from the mining communities.

From http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/26399-sunspot-theory-of-global-warming/ Variations in the Sun's total energy output (luminosity) are caused by changing dark (sunspot) and bright structures on the solar disk during the 11-year sunspot cycle. The variations measured from spacecraft since 1978 are too small to have contributed appreciably to accelerated global warming over the past 30 years. In this Review, we show that detailed analysis of these small output variations has greatly advanced our understanding of solar luminosity change, and this new understanding indicates that brightening of the Sun is unlikely to have had a significant influence on global warming since the seventeenth century. Looks like Solar irradiance has decreased over the past few decades and is poorly correlated with temperature trends over the last 100 years, and the trends are too small to have outweighed the anthropogenic signal especially from 1950 onwards (early century warming can be associated with higher magnitudes of solar forcing) . (Gilgen et al., 1998; Crowley, 2000; Stanhill and Cohen, 2001; Max Plank Institute, 2004; Foukal et al., 2006; Lockwood and Frohlich 2007; IPCC, 2007) Moreover, we know from the IPCC TAR that night temperatures are increasing at a faster rate than daytime temperatures, which is inconsistent with a primary external influence from the sun and consistent with increase in greenhouse gases. Moreover, the troposphere is warming while higher layers (Stratosphere, mesosphere, theremosphere) are cooling, which again, is not consistent with the primary influence from the sun. In short, The decrease in lower stratospheric temperatures is the result of decreased ozone concentrations at the tropopause and greater insulation by greenhouse gases in the troposphere. The lower stratosphere has cooled primarily due to ozone depletion, while the troposphere has warmed from the enhanced greenhouse effect. The thermal profile of the stratosphere is the result of a balance between radiative heating and cooling rates due to greenhouse gases(ie CO2, O3, water vapor). The reason the stratosphere cools with increase of CO2 is the balance in the stratosphere is between absorption of solar radiation by O3 and cooling by infrared emission. As you increase CO2, there is radiative cooling, therefore, the stratosphere cools to come back into balance. Increase of greenhouse gases at the troposphere creates an increased temperature gradient so that anything below will generaly warm, while anything above will cool. This is also consistent with temperature trends at the mesosphere and thermosphere (see Lastovicka et al., 2006) and a comparison made by the study- Quote "The increase in global surface air temperature during the 20th century has been attributed mainly to the increasing atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases. In the upper atmosphere, the radiative effects of greenhouse gases, particularly CO2, become more pronounced and produce a cooling rather than a warming effect. This effect is demonstrated by the CO2-dominated atmosphere of Venus, where the troposphere is more than twice as warm as Earth's and the thermosphere is 4 to 5 times as cold " Addition as well- numerous studies now demonstrate that over the last 60 years or so the anthropogenic signal is strongly detectable and overwhelms "natural" external forcings (Ammann et al 2007) and that if there was a strong solar forcing to come it would only be of more concern as the radiative physics behind more CO2 in the atmosphere is well known. Much is known about the physics of climate change, and this paradigm, developed from many parts of science over the decades, has repeatedly proven to be successfully predictive as well as explanatory with high confidence. Much work remains to fully understand paleoclimatic templates (such as "tipping points" or abrupt climate change), feedbacks, and to assess possible implications for the future, but the foundations for this work are remarkably solid.

Football badges etc mean jack ****, but it would be dumb to sack Adkins if we don't go up this season.

Surely that's worse, leaving someone to slowly bleed to death without helping.? Either way the system is ****ed up. The government should introduce a common sense court, a team of judges that can over-rule any other court in the land for cases like this.

..which the scientists take into account when doing their measurements.

Sounds daft but according to NASA Novermber was the hottest on record... http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2010november/ Back to the cold air in Europe: is it possible that reduced Arctic sea ice is affecting weather patterns? Because Hudson Bay (and Baffin Bay, west of Greenland) are at significantly lower latitudes than most of the Arctic Ocean, global warming may cause them to remain ice free into early winter after the Arctic Ocean has become frozen insulating the atmosphere from the ocean. The fixed location of the Hudson-Baffin heat source could plausibly affect weather patterns, in a deterministic way — Europe being half a Rossby wavelength downstream, thus producing a cold European anomaly in the trans-Atlantic seesaw. Several ideas about possible effects of the loss of Arctic sea ice on weather patterns are discussed in papers referenced by Overland, Wang and Walsh. http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/reportcard/atmosphere.html While 2009 showed a slowdown in the rate of annual air temperature increases in the Arctic, the first half of 2010 shows a near record pace with monthly anomalies of over 4°C in northern Canada. There continues to be significant excess heat storage in the Arctic Ocean at the end of summer due to continued near-record sea ice loss. There is evidence that the effect of higher air temperatures in the lower Arctic atmosphere in fall is contributing to changes in the atmospheric circulation in both the Arctic and northern mid-latitudes. Winter 2009-2010 showed a new connectivity between mid-latitude extreme cold and snowy weather events and changes in the wind patterns of the Arctic; the so-called Warm Arctic-Cold Continents pattern.

It's impossible know wether it was Pardew messing up or Pardew being undermined that was the problem.

We could still easily finish the season as champions, strengthening the team in january would be vital. I don't think Cortese making statements like "I am not contemplating anything other than automatic promotion" is helping in any way though. Reminds me of Lowe's "want to be challenging for Champions League" statement. Obviously promotion is more achievable than that but it still adds to the weight of expectation on the player's shoulders. A couple of good signings and we will get promoted IMO.

Them picking the wrong brother will do more for the future of the Conservative party than anything Dippy Dave does.

She was a c*nt but she was good at war. Belgrano, Iranian Embassy and Irish shoot to kill were her highlights.

Make savings where possible but hit the highest earners with MASSIVE tax increases. Too much greed in the world today