Sheaf Saint

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2014/jan/09/global-warming-humans-not-sun?CMP=fb_us&commentpage=1 I won't post the whole article, as no doubt there will be some who have already decided that because it is in the Guardian, it must be leftist claptrap and won't bother reading past the first paragraph. Suffice to say it cites three recently published papers which reinforce the IPCC claim of 95% probability that climate change is a result of human activity. The first paper used two extremes of natural variability in their models and states "...we investigate two extreme cases of the plausible temporal structures of the internal variability, and we find that the anthropogenic signal is robust and significant." The second paper presents the findings of a study of the sun's influence on climate variability over the last millennium. It states that the sun is only likely to have caused around 15% of the observed warming over the last 300 years, and concludes "Over the twentieth century, anthropogenic forcings dominate with GHGs (Greenhouse Gases) the largest forcing, offset by the effect of anthropogenic aerosols and land use changes" The third paper looks at the pattern of cloud formation due to increased levels of water vapour in the atmosphere, and rebukes the contrarian claim that increased cloud cover would reflect more heat away from the atmosphere and offset the warming effect of known positive feedbacks that are accelerating climate change. You can view an interview with one of the authors

I didn't really get hold of much new music in 2013 (something I must rectify this year) but my favourite release was probably To Dust by Alice Russell.

Wow. Is this what passes for journalism these days? That's just a load of absolute drivel written by somebody who clearly has no knowledge of the facts.

And despite claiming to have a degree in chemistry, he refers to carbon dioxide as CO2 instead of CO2. I smell a rat

Soy production is a large cause, but not the biggest cause. 91% of land deforested in the Amazon since 1970 is used for livestock pasture... http://www-wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2004/02/02/000090341_20040202130625/Rendered/PDF/277150PAPER0wbwp0no1022.pdf So when you consider that tropical wet forest has a higher biomass per hectare than any other type of ecosystem, and that vast areas of tropical wet forest (91% of an estimated 60 million hectares by 2001 in Brazil alone) are being cleared and replaced with grass, do you not imagine that is going to have some effect on the carbon cycle?

You say that, but the giant earth-movers and chainsaws burn hydrocarbons for fuel, so it can be truly said that the process of deforestation does contribute to CO2 emissions.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nut-say-new-year-survey-is-damning-indictment-against-michael-gove-9034929.html

Bi-o-mass noun 1. Ecology . the amount of living matter in a given habitat, expressed either as the weight of organisms per unit area or as the volume of organisms per unit volume of habitat. So cutting down vast areas of rainforest and replacing it with grazing land does not constitute removal of biomass then, no?

Seriously? You claim to have a background in chemistry and yet you can't see the quite obvious link between the removal of biomass and the subsequent weakened ability of the remaining biomass to absorb atmospheric CO2? Seriously???

What has happened to our pressing game? I know we have had a few enforced personnel changes recently but I've seen no sign of the tactic that was working so well for us early in the season. Our forwards got nothing today because Chelsea completely bossed the midfield after Cork went off. I'm really beginning to wonder about MO's subs lately. They always seem to have a negative effect on the team rather than a positive one.

For f***s sake this is embarrassing. We can't even get near the ball and every time we do we just give it straight back to them. That was an absolute abortion of an attempted pass from Gaston who has been completely anonymous in the 2nd half (along with all our other attacking players before anybody accuses me of scapegoating)

Little point in bringing on an attacking player if you are sacrificing your ability to win the ball in midfield to feed the ball to them.

True. But I am starting to question the wisdom of Pochettino's substitutions recently. Twice in the last two games he has taken Cork off when he has been playing well, and we lose the midfield. As I type, once again we let them through with too much ease and they score again.

Can't hurt I suppose...

When is Wanyama back? We so badly miss him at the moment.

The subs are the difference. They can bring on that kind of quality, and we have kids on our bench.

Hhmmmm. Taking Cork off was probably a mistake.

Can't wait to hear Moron-io try and defend that one.

Just got in and finding a stream. How was the first half?

Given Germany's track record when it comes to losing patience with migrant ethnic communities, I'm not sure that is something we should be wishing for.

Well yes. But then yesterday we had the headline about the NHS introducing charges for immigrants (which still isn't definite I acknowledge). If that extra income is spent on more doctors/nurses then there's no real issue, but then with this current Tory government in charge there's every possibility that extra income will be funnelled straight to the accounts of medical services companies owned by Cameron's mates. It's all a big mess really.

Well, this is the key point isn't it. There are many who are trying to make out like every single Romanian and Bulgarian citizen is going to be queueing up to get into the UK, conveniently forgetting that there are numerous other countries where they will also want to settle (maybe ones with a nicer climate than our own, for instance).

A close friend of mine suffered a serious head trauma in a motorway pile-up a few years ago, and so far the reports coming from Grenoble are eerily similar. He was apparently conscious when he was taken into the hospital but following emergency surgery he was kept in an induced coma for over two weeks because they wanted to allow the swelling to go down before they revived him. I expect it will be a while yet before any news of Schumi's condition is released.

9/10? 9/20 would be more accurate