Guided Missile

I assume "intellectual pygmy" is OK...

The Cooling World Newsweek, April 28, 1975 There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production – with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth. The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now. The regions destined to feel its impact are the great wheat-producing lands of Canada and the U.S.S.R. in the North, along with a number of marginally self-sufficient tropical areas – parts of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indochina and Indonesia – where the growing season is dependent upon the rains brought by the monsoon. The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it. In England, farmers have seen their growing season decline by about two weeks since 1950, with a resultant overall loss in grain production estimated at up to 100,000 tons annually. During the same time, the average temperature around the equator has risen by a fraction of a degree – a fraction that in some areas can mean drought and desolation. Last April, in the most devastating outbreak of tornadoes ever recorded, 148 twisters killed more than 300 people and caused half a billion dollars’ worth of damage in 13 U.S. states. To scientists, these seemingly disparate incidents represent the advance signs of fundamental changes in the world’s weather. The central fact is that after three quarters of a century of extraordinarily mild conditions, the earth’s climate seems to be cooling down. Meteorologists disagree about the cause and extent of the cooling trend, as well as over its specific impact on local weather conditions. But they are almost unanimous in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century. If the climatic change is as profound as some of the pessimists fear, the resulting famines could be catastrophic. “A major climatic change would force economic and social adjustments on a worldwide scale,” warns a recent report by the National Academy of Sciences, “because the global patterns of food production and population that have evolved are implicitly dependent on the climate of the present century.” A survey completed last year by Dr. Murray Mitchell of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reveals a drop of half a degree in average ground temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere between 1945 and 1968. According to George Kukla of Columbia University, satellite photos indicated a sudden, large increase in Northern Hemisphere snow cover in the winter of 1971-72. And a study released last month by two NOAA scientists notes that the amount of sunshine reaching the ground in the continental U.S. diminished by 1.3% between 1964 and 1972. To the layman, the relatively small changes in temperature and sunshine can be highly misleading. Reid Bryson of the University of Wisconsin points out that the Earth’s average temperature during the great Ice Ages was only about seven degrees lower than during its warmest eras – and that the present decline has taken the planet about a sixth of the way toward the Ice Age average. Others regard the cooling as a reversion to the “little ice age” conditions that brought bitter winters to much of Europe and northern America between 1600 and 1900 – years when the Thames used to freeze so solidly that Londoners roasted oxen on the ice and when iceboats sailed the Hudson River almost as far south as New York City. Just what causes the onset of major and minor ice ages remains a mystery. “Our knowledge of the mechanisms of climatic change is at least as fragmentary as our data,” concedes the National Academy of Sciences report. “Not only are the basic scientific questions largely unanswered, but in many cases we do not yet know enough to pose the key questions.” Meteorologists think that they can forecast the short-term results of the return to the norm of the last century. They begin by noting the slight drop in overall temperature that produces large numbers of pressure centers in the upper atmosphere. These break up the smooth flow of westerly winds over temperate areas. The stagnant air produced in this way causes an increase in extremes of local weather such as droughts, floods, extended dry spells, long freezes, delayed monsoons and even local temperature increases – all of which have a direct impact on food supplies. “The world’s food-producing system,” warns Dr. James D. McQuigg of NOAA’s Center for Climatic and Environmental Assessment, “is much more sensitive to the weather variable than it was even five years ago.” Furthermore, the growth of world population and creation of new national boundaries make it impossible for starving peoples to migrate from their devastated fields, as they did during past famines. Climatologists are pessimistic that political leaders will take any positive action to compensate for the climatic change, or even to allay its effects. They concede that some of the more spectacular solutions proposed, such as melting the Arctic ice cap by covering it with black soot or diverting arctic rivers, might create problems far greater than those they solve. But the scientists see few signs that government leaders anywhere are even prepared to take the simple measures of stockpiling food or of introducing the variables of climatic uncertainty into economic projections of future food supplies. The longer the planners delay, the more difficult will they find it to cope with climatic change once the results become grim reality. —PETER GWYNNE with bureau report :lol::lol:

...and you've got this nutter: No wonder you deleted references to him from your post. "Chemistry World?" You really are an intellectual pygmy, who prefers this guys opinion to Edward Teller, a scientist whose arse you're not fit to wipe...

"RB" has, after nearly losing his shirt at the Rose Bowl, already been bailed out of his egotistical folly, by the taxpayers of Eastleigh. With the Rose /Ageas Bowl losing money hand over fist, it beggars belief that Keith House didn't want Southampton Football Club any where near Eastleigh, but preferred the financial model that is county cricket. Cricket ground? This is a cricket ground...

Einstein's dead, so I guess there goes the Theory of Relativity. You really are a muppet.... ....and latest developments??? Give me a break. You obviously didn't read this paper, since which, nothing of note has happened, apart from billions of tax dollars being p! $$ed away on meaningless research. Still, I have a feeling that you have made your mind up on this issue, so you carry on and keep worrying. Luckily the penny has dropped at number 10.

The Co-op bank have funded the hotel build at the Ageas bowl. The developer, Denizen, has gone into administration and work on the £28m development has stopped. Completion on budget relies on another developer taking up the contract and the Co-op bank or someone else financing the rest of the build. My gut feel is that none of the supposedly 8 developers willing to jump into Denizens shoes, will do it for anything like the original build cost. I also think Co-op bank is in no position to extend/increase the funding for this project. I am also suspicious that, with no sane bank on earth willing to finance a hotel to supply the 3 men and his dog who want to stay in a hotel in West End to watch cricket, the additional cost of the completion will fall onto the Eastleigh taxpayers. I would also like to know, as a Co-op member, what Rev. Paul Flowers role was in approving this loan and whether it relied on his prior contacts with Eastleigh Borough Council.

I would like people to consider who is on my side in this debate. Please look at this site and ignore the amateur, bed wetting, alarmists on this thread. Amongst the scientists who signed the petition are Edward Teller, ​Arnold Beckman, Philip Abelson, William Nierenberg, and Martin Kamen For those that don't know who these scientists are, google them. They are even smarter than me...

All of which brings me back to my theory that if you p!$$ in the sea at Weston Shore, it will contribute to a rise in the sea level. I think the majority of scientists would agree with my theory...

Read this d!ckwad...you might learn something.

I said to a mate of mine a while ago that any banker who agrees to fund that large white elephant in West End must be on drugs. According to this article, it appears I was right: Who's going to dig Eastleigh Borough Council out of the sh !t, but more importantly, how much more money will the Eastleigh taxpayer lose. It would be interesting if the Reverends local "links" influenced the banks' decision to spunk £28 million and counting.

Looks like the PM has been following my posts.... ....let's hope he cuts the green levy ASAP!

Some advice, Hokie. As you get older, you will learn that humans are, in general, prone to mass hysteria for no better reason than some loud mouth, or even worse, some group of loud mouths, communicates something that is slightly worrying. It all relates to the fact that by and large, we are all clinging to a decaying planet, a meteor strike away from following the dinosaurs and kept alive by a sun that has a finite life. We get grounded by an erupting volcano in Iceland, the name of which we can't even spell, just as we were about to take the girlfriend off to Majorca for a long weekend. We are worried that next time we step out the front door, we will be over our wellies in water due to a rising sea level. We don't like aerosols because they deplete the ozone layer, we had to replace our fridge and the Met Office, who failed to tell us a tree was falling on our house in 1987, reckons we're killing the planet, but even the scientists can't agree. All we know is that our fuel bills and tax are going up. When you're down the pub, with your drunken mate, have another beer and talk about football, because this thread is seriously affecting your mental health... And believe me, the human race is not destroying the planet. We are no where near important or powerful enough...now go and have a lie down.

The reason that the development of nuclear power bit the dust in the UK was not for economic or democratic political reasons. It was because the Soviet Union helped fund and support the CND in the UK, which did its best to subvert public opinion. The CND were communist puppets working during the cold war in an attempt to affect the nuclear capability of the UK. What I find laughable is that anyone can argue against nuclear power on the basis of a few accidents that killed a few dozen people. Yeah, I know we can carry out cancer death approximations and claim the increased radiation exposure from these accidents might have led to 50 thousand to a million deaths from cancer, but yet again, dubious statistics have been used to suppress technology. My guess is that these nuclear accidents caused about as much cancer globally, as sun beds have. Smoking is estimated to kill 5.4 million people a year and I struggle to see any lobbyists calling for a ban on selling tobacco. One day, the ignorant will allow scientists develop answers to the world's problems and when the technologies that their theories produce, are occasionally proven wrong, trust these scientists to improve them. I'm not holding my breath...

I'd contract the Russians and Chinese to build us new nuclear power plants, as, during the last outbreak of bed wetting, the green lobby and their chums in politics effectively killed an industry the UK pioneered. Who knows what would have happened if the British scientists had been allowed to continue developing the technology. We may even have introduced thorium reactors to replace the uranium based ones we are forced to build as replacements. Might be worth all you beard-strokers reading this.

You just don't understand the Arctic graph. The source of the data is from http://nsidc.org/ , not the Daily Mail and I believe the data rather than your desperate googling to support your case. The Northwest passage has been opened and closed over the last few hundred years more times than Rev. Flowers wallet. As far the Royal Society, their stance on "global warming" shows just how low the media fueled scientists in this former august body have sunk, in continuing to follow the bandwagon that they jumped on. Tell them that bandwagon is now called "climate change", as "global warming" has not happened for the past 15 years. I believe in climate change. It has happened since the earth formed. In the short term, (I mean hundreds of years), the earths atmosphere and climate is by and large self-regulating, plus or minus 0.75oC due to the laws of that great member of the Royal Society, Isaac Newton. Any changes caused by mankind are akin to you p!$$ing off Weston Shore and worrying about the rise in sea level. So, accept the earth's climate is largely beyond our control and far too complex to model accurately. Rather, try to stop the damage caused to our society, by the climate change b0ll0x, spouted by the same bunch that moved us away from nuclear power generation and on to f***ing wind turbines, solar panels in the sunless UK, et al. Frankly, I'm fed up to the teeth of paying for it in my taxes and fuel bills.

Here's another couple for you, this time Arctic and Antarctic: So, in other words, don't fall for the nutters looking for research dollars to support their wacky global warming, now called climate change bullsh !t. It just costs us more money in taxes and energy prices. If you don't believe the graphs above, ask your self why no government, company or organisation is planning on making billions in transport savings on the imminent year round opening of the Northwest passage. The reason is that they know, like windmills, it makes absolutely no economic sense because it isn't going to happen....

Go easy on George, Bexy. He obviously doesn't have access to the information on which you base your expert analysis. Let me help him:

Cry me a river...

Is sacking Nigel Adkins today the correct decision? Yes 6.64% Bensfcno1, ByTheGolacs, channonball, choccyboxkid, Dalek2003, DarrenLeTiss, david in sweden, dickyhale, Dr Octopus, equalizer, farawaysaint, FarehamRed, gaz, Guided Missile, hugh, John B, JustinR, loz1991, lydlinch saints, mack rill, manina-pub, manji, musesaint, Nick75Sfc, Nolan, opthomps, ozzmeister, Painswick Saint, Pedro, Pete Pots, RonManager, Rorymac, saint77, saintalan, SaintJimbo, skintsaint, sotonianproud, StBaz, tartan_saint, the colonel, Tony10, wadesmith, Waterside.saint, Winchester Red, Window Cleaner

Thanks, Sherlock...

© Windbag Publications

He doesn't speak English, has only had one managerial appointment before, sacked by that club when they were bottom of the league, no experience of managing a Premiership club, not even any experience of English football. I accept that he might well be brilliant and that he is highly regarded by many and might become the next Mourinho. But on the other hand he might be an unmitigated disaster. We'll have to wait and see, but at the moment, until we have evidence to ground a realistic opinion on, those currently fearing that Cortese might have made a dreadful mistake hold the same validity to their opinion as do those who think that Cortese might have produced a management change that is a masterstroke. Put me in the camp that questions whether Pochettino has the credentials to take us to the next stage.

Interesting post match reaction from Huddlestone:

Is this the story, Jimi?

"It's been a rough year for the musician, but at least he has his millions of dollars to ease the pain. 50-year-old Jarvis Cocker has taken the No. 1 spot on People With Money’s top 10 highest-paid musicians for 2013 with an estimated $75 million in combined earnings." Joe Cocker....you have to laugh....