Minty

Sadly they were pipped to the post by Fulham on Saturday morning, who beat Norwich 4-3 to go back top of the group, but Saints should still be proud of what they've achieved once again, missing out by just one point and losing just 5 games all season. Jason Dodd is doing a great job and let's hope that continues in line with our first team progress! Final league table is here: http://www.fulhamfc.com/Club/Academy/LeagueTable/LeagueTable.aspx

No, but it is a shame how the default setting for some is to blindly criticise rather than seeking to understand.

This needed a follow up:

Good point, well made.

One step at a time Adrian...

Let's hope so, we got promoted then too...

OK, so it's not original, but I don't care.

Can quite happily say that I haven't and think they look stupid personally. Dune will have to tell us if that means i'm not a real lefty as a result...

Awesome. I've seen you try and shoehorn in your political labels to a few bizarre threads, but even I didn't expect you to try and do it on a clothing thread...

Well whilst I have some sympathy for this point of view, in light of the potential enormity of the situation, we wouldn't be where we are in the world today if people gave up just because they thought something was difficult. And actually, whilst China may be somewhat reckless in their pursuit of Western-style growth, they aren't completely stupid. If we put the time and effort into improving low-carbon technologies, and it is shown to be of benefit to the world, they'll soon want a piece of that pie. In everything in life, I believe we should all focus on what we do first, and try to influence others second. You can only do the latter if you lead by example, otherwise you're a hypocrite. Or a politician. (Oops, sorry)

While Saintandy666's reply isn't exactly helpful, you don't help yourself with some of your comments. As I said, I'm all for learning more, so I'd genuinely be interested to know exactly why you believe the evidence that Andy mentions is "2+2=5"... ignore politics and taxation, lets stick to the science here. It is entirely healthy to challenge what we know, but it has to be done objectively. And as someone who works in the NHS, I can categorically state that H1N1 Avian Flu was certainly not a rip-off. Try telling that to those who lost someone to it. Its effect was not as widespread as feared but once again, a precautionary approach must be taken. If you have pre-conceived ideas about science or scientists then I struggle to know how you'll ever form an objective opinion, other than becoming an expert in these subjects yourself and doing the research for yourself.

I tried the phone number thing, and it worked for me. So if you're getting the blank last page, retry it, remove leading zeros from telephone numbers and retry. You should then get the marketing options and T+C tick boxes at the end. Not ideal.

That's kinda cool.

Dear Nicola, Why the f*ck are you reading SaintsWeb? Save yourself while there's still time. Yours sincerely, Minty

You need to remember who the majority of his audience are... I imagine you need the same qualities as a CBBC presenter.

A classic example of how the combination of a silly, unsubstantiated rumour and social media can feed the world completely wrong information.

How can you be so certain? Especially if... Sounds to me like you've made your mind up and also aren't willing to evolve if evidence demonstrates otherwise? Whilst other scientists presented an alternative view which was then proven and accepted. That's what happens. Any true Scientist should be equally as willing for their work to be disproven as proven, and to simply increase understanding. Can you not see the irony in your post? You seem to refuse to believe something other than what you believe. Being a skeptic is very healthy as long as you remain open to all possibilities.

It's called (amongst other things) the Precautionary Principle and it's just common sense to me. However, far from simply being a way of possibly avoiding potential catastrophe, it should also be looked at as a golden opportunity to lead the world in new technology. With fossil fuels dwindling and demand for power increasing, the potential rewards for anyone with the foresight to significantly research and invest renewables and low-carbon technologies are great.

What contradiction is there? Science currently agrees that the climate is changing, that the planet is warming. Science also currently strongly suggests that man has had significant impact on this, but the exact degree of influence, and therefore when we might reach certain 'tipping points', is subject to modelling and interpretation and therefore it is entirely possible that people might say 'No, I was wrong about that'. The fact you agree with the second highlighted sentence is good, on the face of it, until you then try to tell me that it is 'hysteria' and 'guilt-trip crap'. THAT is a contradiction. If you genuinely believe we still have lots to learn then you have to accept that you might be wrong. And given that science currently thinks you're wrong anyway, quite where you get such a stubborn opinion is baffling. I've said it before but I am quite happy to accept that as science learns more, the AGW theory may well be completely disproven. That would be a good thing for everyone, although current deniers seem only interested in point scoring and political rhetoric to back up views with a minority of current evidence. Are you able to accept that you might be wrong, even ignoring the current weight of evidence? Your dismissal of the subject with silly name calling, and attempts to prove a point by quoting local weather examples, rather than global climate trends, also weakens your argument. I completely agree. The planet will be fine. What we're talking about here is the effect on the human race. Well, for starters, this is a discussion forum, so that's kind of the point of the place. Secondly, anyone who thinks we need to learn about this, should be willing to discuss and debate it with a view to doing exactly that. Dismissing it as you attempt to do would seem to indicate that you've made your mind up and don't want to learn any more. That's all well and good, and I'm all for hearing different views, but you've yet to present any credible point of view.

And here we are again. Scientist admits, in good faith, that his previous predictions were 'over-extrapolated' and that gets interpreted by some as being 'The whole thing is rubbish'. Erm, no. Gotta love this line inparticular: As I've said time and again, the science surrounding these things is not exact. It will never tell us exactly when something will or will not happen. But the basic premise still holds true and the only thing that has been amended is the prediction of how quickly we might see particular impacts. Frankly, thinking this is something to be laughed at, and used as a point-scoring exercise, is pretty sad IMO. This is still a very serious issue that we have so much to learn about and as always, for the sake of my kids and their kids, I hope science continues to look into it and learn as much as they can, both in terms of prevention and adaptation.

I still think taking 3000 to Middlesbrough for what is a tv game, is pretty good, irrespective of the nature of it.

So, basically, as I said right at the top: Control the controllables!

But can you work out which SaintsWeb accounts are fake?

Adrian Durham deserves only to be ignored. Anything more than that and he has fulfilled his duty, and I wouldn't want to give him the satisfaction.