Minty

Any particular type?

I've just posted the link and basic details on Saintslist.

Not sure how big this is but probably similar.

I think Charlie Wayman has already won that honour... in another thread somewhere.

Can a mod sticky this one and unsticky the original?

Good points, sorry, forgot about that. I'll get sharing it too.

Agreed. I have no problem with helping people who want to help themselves, but this kind of complete lack of respect for other people and property (as reported) stinks. Take some responsibility for your life.

Can I suggest you perhaps start a new thread with the up-to-date information, including this text? I think a lot of people might miss it otherwise as it is buried within this thread? I also think that now that Nicola is supporting this, it would be worth publicising it a bit more to get other fans who aren't necessarily on SaintsWeb involved? Just MHO.

Indecisive?

It's all about forming (and breaking) habits. It takes time and effort and willpower to do so and when the examples still being set by previous generations are not positive either, it is often easier for many people to maintain the status quo. There are different stages of change when it comes to things like this, or any other change... you first have to be aware of the issue, then you have to care about the issue. Once you care enough, you may form an intention to make a change, but then comes the hardest part... actually making the change. Even if you make the change, can you maintain the change? If so, great, that's the hard part, and then once you have embedded the change you are then more likely to communicate the change to others. That is a very simplified version and I can't remember who came up with it first, but you can apply it to everything from recycling to stopping smoking... the mental stages we go through can all take time and effort and it is easy to criticise people who we perceive to not be making any effort, when actually they are still learning about something or forming a strong enough opinion to want to make a change. Any criticism of that is likely to put them back, not encourage them forward, which is why I am always very positive when talking about sustainability and other such issues that I believe in... there is no point criticising others for what they don't do, as it will put them off... better to encourage them for what they do do and help move them forward to make further changes. Sorry, I'm wittering on a bit, but you can probably tell it's something I care about.

My wife loves Perranporth. Not yet been myself.

Completely agree. Despite what I said above, I constantly have my own little battle in my head about 'Why do I bother?' when so many others seemingly don't, but IMO it's all about linking things back to the individual and educating people as to why I think it matters. Global weather patterns interest perhaps less than 0.5% of people on the planet on a day-to-day basis, but the price of food and transport do, availability of water does for large parts of the planet, extreme weather events are starting to affect (and kill) more and more people... the more of these things that do creep into daily life, the more people will, willingly, sit up and take notice. The armageddon thing is also important. Fear is a very real problem. People need to feel like they can do something and that a positive outcome is possible, otherwise they can be more inclined to hide away and do the whole 'La la la, I can't see it so it's not happening' thing. So the focus needs to be more on what we CAN do, than what we CAN'T or won't be able to, should things continue the way they're going.

Fair point OldNick. However we can't do anything about the Chinese and Indian people directly, we can only do what we can do. And if we lead the way and it is shown to be worthwhile, then other countries often follow suit. Also, many developing Eastern countries model themselves on current Western lifestyles... which is what is causing a lot of the problem in the first place. So by taking the lead and demonstrating that actually, we now recognise we need to change, it is more likely to influence them in the future IMO. As always, there are two options, the easy one (do nothing) or the hard one (do something). Easy choices are rarely the better ones. Or another way of putting it is: Do you want to be part of the problem or part of the solution? Nothing will be 'fixed' overnight... but personally I would rather be part of the solution if I can.

Well I can't pretend to understand it all (I am in a very similar position to yourself) but it could simply be (also like me) that your high level of existing borrowing goes against you. It is probably going to depend on who else you might apply to and what for. For example, I cannot borrow from Lloyds TSB because I have outstanding debt with them which was quite a bit of money. It's all budgeted and paid on time and I have a faultless repayment record, but my net worth to them is too high for anything new, or even a restructuring. However, I was able to borrow with another lender when I needed to a few years ago, because my net worth to them wasn't as bad. If you have a credit card, I would suggest you start using it more, and repaying the balance off in full, for example for the weekly shop or something, as that can help also.

The greater the impact, the more of a **** I think people will give... hence why so many people believe it is right and proper to address it now, before our kids and their kids bear the brunt. I couldn't do that to my kids.

That might be their opinion, based on I-don't-know-what criteria, but lenders and banks will only look at the content... but what about the actual detail on the report? Any late payments showing? (I know you say you've had none, but that doesn't mean a mistake hasn't been made, which is why it's important to look through the whole report, not just any headline 'score') You need to find out WHY they're saying poor or very poor... read that page on MSE through and go from there.

Firstly, there's not such thing as a 'credit rating' as such... you have a credit history and different companies will use it accordingly. Who has stated you are 'Poor' or 'Very poor'? Your bank? That will be based on their own system. Secondly, banks/finance companies' opinion of you is influenced more by profit than risk... if you can make them profit, then they're more interested in lending. Risk does come into it but actually not as much as people think. The amount of money going in to your account is therefore often more important than the the amount going out. All I would suggest at this point is to get a copy of your credit report from one the main companies (only costs £2 online) and go from there. http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/loans/credit-rating-credit-score for lots more info and reading.

It's not actually that bad an article in many respects. It's just a shame it completely undermines any good points it makes with its political rhetoric and utterly ridiculous conclusion.

Temperatures have been measured since about 1880, but tree-ring analysis gives temperature information (that correlates with the actual measurements since 1880) since approx 1000AD. Absolutely, the media does not help the rational consideration of what is happening and why... it makes things a lot worse because we are prone to a lot more knee-jerk reaction and sensationalism. Solar activity has actually decreased overall since 1960, in direct contrast to land and sea temperature measurements, and this, combined with the knowledge and proliferation of 'greenhouse gases' has led to the conclusion that the sun has been less responsible than man's influence. Of course, new evidence may change that, but there has been a lot of studies into it, all of which conclude the same thus far.

I didn't say they were freak events, or comment on how long they lasted. I simple commented on the fact that two specific, local, examples were given, and that local examples do not reflect GLOBAL trends. But to pick up on your point, what evidence do you have to say that just because something lasted decades 'suggests that the changes were part of the natural cycle of climate change'? Some of them will have been natural, I fully accept that. But to then assume that all changes in climate are natural is very poor science. http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-change-little-ice-age-medieval-warm-period-basic.htm

OK, I don't personally know that they were localised, however, as my links provided above will confirm, citing local issues such as these rarely, if ever, links to global climate patterns.

These were localised issues that do not reflect the GLOBAL climate. There is some excellent, and fully referenced, reading on this site: http://www.skepticalscience.com, and specifically http://www.skepticalscience.com/its-not-us.htm, with different levels of explanation depending on your scientific knowledge and understanding.

I think this is a nice fence.

No, he means at his place.

You'd think people would be used to it by now. Go about your business, have a drink, maybe a biscuit, and stop obsessing with needing to know about every tiny announcement the second it is announced.