badgerx16

He would be OK, he can walk on water.

35 trillion today or no Earth tomorrow. Tough choice.

Humanity may well have to come collectively to a way of living that is far less consumerist and resource hungry. The World struggles to support the current population, and this will be especially so if the vast majority around the globe, who lack so much that the West considers 'normal', continue to desire the goods and lifestyle that the developed countries have in abundance. ( Let alone the environmental damage that mining for rare earth metals entails, and the polluting aspects of an increasing dependance on battey technologies for power and transport ).

Chicken and egg ? Analysis of historical data and archaeological / geological investigation shows a fairly consistant Global temperature range for the nearly 2000 years from 0AD to the 1930s. The subsequent years, to the present day, are the years of greatest increase in atmospheric CO2, and the years of greatest rate of increase of Global temperatures. This increase in CO2 can be attributed to direct action, such as the consumption of fossil fuels that generates CO2, to lesser direct factors such as the manufacturing of concrete, and to indirect actions, such as deforestation, reduction of 'green' environments, and pollution of the seas. which all reduce the amount of CO2 being extracted from the atmosphere naturally by plant and marine life. You then end up in a feedback loop where the warming attributed to icreased CO2 causes environmental changes that in turn serve to further reduce the ability of the Global environment to naturally balance CO2 levels. So to answer your question, human production of CO2 started the process but the rate of change is now being exacerbated by natural events. The trick now is to find a new point of balance, the genie is too far out of the bottle to be put back in and permit things to settle back to the measurements from 200 years ago.

Not wearing 'rose tints' at all. Sometimes irony and sarcasm are wasted on here. Go back up the thread, or any match thread, and count how many comments refer to 'big team bias'. Read the comments above about the upgrade of JWP's punishment, or the number of shirt pulls by Chelsea players that went 'unpunished'. I actually believe that there is some level of psychological influence that refs experience, partly due to the media pressure that the more affluent and successful teams can bring to bear in trying to preserve their dominance. It is not necessarily demonstrated in concious decsions, as the conspiracy theorists would claim, but things that are marginal can be tilted.

Technology that confirmed a win for the 'big' team ?

Still not convinced that third goal actually crossed the line.

Can anybody remember when Redmond last actually tried to take on an opponent ?

We need to defend crosses better - 2 unopposed headers scored, luckily 1 ruled out.

Why are there never defenders on the posts ?

Sometimes his medication kicks in, if only for a few lucid moments.

It's when there are posts like this that I miss Wes Tender's thoughtful and balanced insight into the UK fishing industry post Brexit. 😏

Somewhere in there is a decent post, but your usual drivel, in this case climate scepticism, always has to bubble to the surface and spoil things unnecessarily. You are so embedded in your scorn that it is impossible for you to escape.

Yet again you have it wrong, it was 1984.

"What have the Romans ever done for us ?"

You have that the wrong way round; she does not have the job because she is a lesbian, GM resents her having the job because she is a lesbian. ( Though the fact she is female is probably enough for him ).

Dave Grohl proving he is just the coolest and nicest guy in rock;

I watched a fascinating program on TV last night that investigated the intelligence of slime moulds.

I have had extremely limited experience of the Met and how it operates, in fact I don't think I have ever had contact or conversation with any of their officers, so I don't think I am in a position to comment. I could comment on the Lancashire or Greater Manchester forces if you like - I do have slightly more exposure to them. However, as per my above comment, I suspect that the people who keep CD in her position probably think she is doing a good enough job for now. If you want a possibly critical comment about the Met, try to find somebody who lives within their remit. ( Note, this does not include GM, who doesn't like CD because she is (a) female, and (b) a lesbian ). EDIT: Actually I forgot, I did once have some contact with the Met. Because of my job I was asked to provide some techinal network tracing information to the Counter Terrorism branch to help them track down the source of a bomb threat that was sent by email to the White House on Sept 12th 2001.

Who negotiated in Doha and agreed the treaty with the Taliban ; Trump, ( or his representatives ), or the generals ?

"Top US defence officials have said the Taliban's takeover of Afghanistan can be traced back to a deal between the group and the Trump administration. The so-called Doha agreement was signed in February 2020 and set a date for the US to withdraw its troops. Gen Frank McKenzie said the deal had a "really pernicious effect" on the Afghan government and military. Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin agreed, saying the agreement had helped the Taliban get "stronger"." https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-58738953

But there is a shortage of clowns ! https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-58733754

So Brexit isn't to blame, but the 'hard Brexit' trade deal has severely reduced the UK's options for recovery because we have opted out of all the mutual support mechanisms.