badgerx16

Onions the hero again , with honourable mentions to Bell and Colly. Think KP owes us something, though.

12 balls to go.............

Do you mean like this, ( Note - from the ToryGraph ) ; http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/6937019/Cold-weather-doesnt-undermine-global-warming-science.html Also, from the Met Office ( mind you they are tightly bound into your conspiracy ) ; http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporate/pressoffice/2010/pr20100106b.html And, then there is this from 2007 ; http://jeffmcintirestrasburg.greenoptions.com/2007/04/12/green-myth-busting-global-warming-and-cold-weather/

Surely Skates would be better turning to Loan Sharks ?

You can guarantee that the roads are passable and public transport is all running nicely, as well.

So if the MOD gave you a payslip with "I.O.U., to be honoured at some point in the future" printed on it, you would take that as payment ? It would certainly not cover your family's outgoings for the three weeks before they claim the money will appear. By not putting the money in the accounts on the due day, they have patently failed to pay the players.

Yup

As long as they do it fairly ; one of the proposed schemes runs pretty much under my house, in an area that is geologically unsuited to bulk gas storage due to the consequences of brine 'mining' by ICI. My worry is that the Government will push the scheme through, in the 'national interest', despite the genuine objections. ( And this isn't just nimbyism - the area is littered with massive sinkholes, some over 150 feet deep, where the salt 'caverns' have subsided. How would you feel having 60 billion cubic feet of pressurised natural gas under your village / town ? In the USA, many states prohibit such storage within 3 miles of habitation, this scheme in total runs directly under the homes of over 100,000 people ).

Half Man Half Biscuit. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbthXudb__A

May have something to do with them getting rid of Irvine.

But you forget, there is always the 'small print'; "We reserve the right to share your information with other selected interested organisations and companies". It will be far too tempting for the Government to raise a little additional cash on the side by allowing health insurance companies to "research" certain aspects of risk, and mysteriously we end up with 'personalised' premiums, tailored by genetic risk factors you never even knew you had. Or maybe we will have some other research institutions looking at genetic pre-disposition for certain behavioural traits, and people being labelled as 'future offenders' from birth. Then again, we could always go the whole hog and run the country eugenically, only permitting the most desirable attributes to be carried forward to the next generation, with every new-born labelled at birth as to how 'society' requires them to develope. I do not trust the Government to keep what it has secure, let alone to use this data solely for the publicly stated intent.

Troll !!!!!

The RSC 'Hamlet', with David Tennant & Patrick Stewart. Saw it in Stratford last year - bit disappointed that they have dressed up the set, it was better as a minimalist presentation, but good stuff none the less.

By my rough & ready maths, based on teams maintaining their form from the last 8 games for the 2nd half of the season, Saints would finish 6th. You need to take into account that we have to play all the teams above us again, starting with the next 3 league games being Colchester ( away ),Huddersfield ( home ), and Millwall ( away ). Also, if we are in with a shout going into the last few games, we should be capable of a really good final burst, as we finish with Yeovil, Carlisle, Gillingham, and Southend. So, not being overly optimistic, I think it's a yes, YES, YES !!!

12 selected 'reasons why climate change is natural', as presented by the Daily Express.............. 49) The head of Britain’s climate change watchdog has predicted households will need to spend up to £15,000 on a full energy efficiency makeover if the Government is to meet its ambitious targets for cutting carbon emissions. 50) Wind power is unlikely to be the answer to our energy needs. The wind power industry argues that there are “no direct subsidies” but it involves a total subsidy of as much as £60 per MWh which falls directly on electricity consumers. This burden will grow in line with attempts to achieve Wind power targets, according to a recent OFGEM report. 51) Wind farms are not an efficient way to produce energy. The British Wind Energy Association (BWEA) accepts a figure of 75 per cent back-up power is required. 53) Climate alarmists have raised the concern over acidification of the oceans but Tom Segalstad from Oslo University in Norway , and others, have noted that the composition of ocean water – including CO2, calcium, and water – can act as a buffering agent in the acidification of the oceans. 55) The argument that climate change is a of result of global warming caused by human activity is the argument of flat Earthers. 56) The manner in which US President Barack Obama sidestepped Congress to order emission cuts shows how undemocratic and irrational the entire international decision-making process has become with regards to emission-target setting. 58 ) Canada has shown the world targets derived from the existing Kyoto commitments were always unrealistic and did not work for the country. 59) In the lead up to the Copenhagen summit, David Davis MP said of previous climate summits, at Rio de Janeiro in 1992 and Kyoto in 1997 that many had promised greater cuts, but “neither happened”, but we are continuing along the same lines. 60) The UK ’s environmental policy has a long-term price tag of about £55 billion, before taking into account the impact on its economic growth. 61) The UN’s panel on climate change warned that Himalayan glaciers could melt to a fifth of current levels by 2035. J. Graham Cogley a professor at Ontario Trent University, claims this inaccurate stating the UN authors got the date from an earlier report wrong by more than 300 years. 62) Under existing Kyoto obligations the EU has attempted to claim success, while actually increasing emissions by 13 per cent, according to Lord Lawson. In addition the EU has pursued this scheme by purchasing “offsets” from countries such as China paying them billions of dollars to destroy atmospheric pollutants, such as CFC-23, which were manufactured purely in order to be destroyed. 65) The globe’s current approach to climate change in which major industrialised countries agree to nonsensical targets for their CO2 emissions by a given date, as it has been under the Kyoto system, is very expensive Can St G or Dune please explain how these points PROVE their case.

Cold snaps can be predicted by global warming theory, and changes in their frequency, severity, and location, lend support to the general theory; http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/a-13-2009-01-14-voa5-68761472.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/topics/weather/4436934/Snow-is-consistent-with-global-warming-say-scientists.html http://climateprogress.org/2009/12/20/global-warming-copenhagen-snow-storm-blizzard-extreme-weather/ http://www.examiner.com/x-558-Congress-Examiner~y2009m12d15-Does-cold-weather-disprove-global-warming-No-says-common-sense http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/60-second-science/post.cfm?id=cold-winter-doesnt-mean-global-warm-2009-02-12 PS, love the bit in the Examiner article which pinches St G's 'sheeple' phrase and turns it on the 'anti's

Would that be the mess the bankers helped to get us into ? On the subject of packaging, why do I have to throw so much that is marked as recyclable into the general rubbish, because the council picks out those types of plastic it will accept ? If it can be recycled, bl00dy well recycle it ! :confused:

There are only 2 things that are certain, and taxes are one of them

Stick your head back in your dune !!!

Agreed

Why don't you go away and actually do some reading on the 'theory'. It is entirely predictable that an overall warming effect can cause such cold spells, they can be induced by changes in trans-oceanic currents that are caused by heat absorbtion by the sea. Historically, Britain's climate has been out of phase with the continent due to the warming effect of the trans-Atlantic currents, we have generally warmer winters than our neighbours. As these currents change course, and use a more southerly track, we come more into the influence of colder northern waters drawn down from the Arctic.

Most canopy and emergent trees live between 300 and 400 years, but some can survive for over 1000. With reference to our own landscape, view them as oaks or yews, rather than pines or birches.

The issue is that 'ancient' rain forest actually has very little soil in the first place. The conditions beneath the canopy enable rapid re-absorbtion and recycling of dead materials, so soil never gets formed from the detritus.

It will, but it will take hundreds, if not thousands, of years for it to happen. The secondary forest will tend to be comprised of tree species that can grow and spread quickly, rather than those that inhabit the 'ancient' parts. These species will be accompanied by other opportunistic, fast growing / spreading, ground cover plants, which strive to stifle the much slower germinating/growing 'old forest' species. The "old" forest will nibble away at the boundary with the "new", and will in time supplant it, but it needs time for it's offspring to gain a foothold. Once the giants get going, however, they will eventually cut out the light that the infiltrators need. The other plants such as mosses and ferns will only spread once the conditions of temperature and humidity have stabilised beneath the new high-level canopy.

Most of which is only usable for about 3 years because the soil is so thin. The forests are so dense because of the leaf litter and other biological waste they trap and recycle. Take away the trees and there is nothing to sustain the ecosystem.