Quote:
Originally Posted by rob  Climate and weather are different things.
Have a nose at Met Office: Climate projections and associated pages - the first two sentances on that site hardly duck the point.
As I said in another thread, I thought the debate was down to the causes (ie. natural cycles v man) rather than if its some global tax conspiracy con!
Do you honestly believe it is as sean says hype dreamt up by a global group to ensure a new wave of tax or the like? |
For me their is a debate whether the weather is cyclical or permanent. If you start to observe the weather over on extreme of that cycle then that is going to stand up for certain people's theories, where the same figures across the full cycle will show something else, but ultimately there is still a debate on is this cyclical, how big is the cycle, how long and how extreme are the events in it?
I personally think it's a con to keep countries like India, african countries and China from overtaking the western countries in GDP. So for that reason I'm all for it.
But as a pragamatic person I hate it, I thought we left this type of behaviour alone back in the 1700's when we were hanging witches. The main thing that seperates our society from that of the 1700's and dunking old women with warts is "proof". Al Gore the witch finder general making money for every witch he finds. Did you know be buys carbon credits to cover his big mansion and air travel, or wait, he buys them off his own company
Proof in my book is the ability to recreate or predict and thos epredictions come true, none of those has even been completed by man made climate change believers.
You proo