Tesco 'ignored residents' over Llanwern wind turbine (From South Wales Argus)

Save the cheerleader, save the world...

What does it take for people to realise that we can't carry on burning fossil fuels at the current rate? Isn't the loss of our reflective 'ice shield' from the top of our world enough to demonstrate that we can't carry on as if nothing is wrong?
.
While the harm that Tesco does to people and ecosystems can never be 'paid for' by saving a mere 2,000 tonnes of carbon each year, changes to our landscapes are inevitable.
.
Every tonne of carbon released by destroying our rainforests and by burning fossil fuels takes our environment closer and closer to that of Venus. Perhaps those who oppose 'everything', might pause to think what their landscape will look like in ten years time if we continue along their preferred path of 'business as usual'.

well said .
i came to the conclusion years ago that the people on this planet are just brain dead idiots who live for today and hopfully there is a tomorow .

Now it is pretty hard to underestimate the intelligence of large parts of the media including this Tuppenny H'penny Rag but just lets suppose that a few of the more intelligent members of that media settle down at night or after work to browse through some Climate blogs.
After all, they are having this Climate stuff thrust in front of them in a mind numbing truckloads of press releases from innumerable Quangos, Do Gooder Outfits, Power Hungry Elitist and Green Nazis, Government Departments of every color and stripe all trying to carry on their nasty little turf wars amongst themselves and curry favour with who ever is the Top Dog at the moment.
So a tiny proportion of the more "Thinking" members of the Media might just like to check for themselves whether a lot of these claims of Global Catastrophes in the making actually carry any weight so they just quietly do a bit of personal internet browsing on Climate Change aka Global Warming.
And lo! They find that there is a whole subculture out there populated by some Pretty Smart people and even some big names in Science are out there, who are openly Skeptical, sometimes disparaging and often just plain derisive of the claims of the Innumerable Climate Change Disaster Press releases that these Media Types see pass across their desks every day.
Press releases that Parrot the endlessly and now the increasingly Boring theme that Imminent Climate Change/ Global Warming Disasters are about to engulf all of mankind and damage and destroy ocean life and will be disaster for most living things and this will all happen by
That sort of claim will make any Good Media person start to snort with derision sooner or later
And strangely some of those Skeptics on those blog sites seem to have some pretty good reasons, even if the Media person doesn’t really understand what they are on about, to back up their claims that Global Warming and Climate Change from man made influences is a non event!
And the browser of the Climate Change blog sites carefully mentions in passing while gossiping around the coffee pot or water cooler that something he came across last night while looking through the internet did not seem to back up a lot of those claims in those press releases today.
And surprise, surprise, somebody else pipes up that, yes, he saw that too and wondered about the claims of a lot of that way out stuff from the Green Nazis.
And somebody else says, who is this Bull Shtr that reckons the Polar Bears will all fall of their Icebergs and drown tomorrow?
Never heard of him before!
From there it is a short step to some Arguments in the Newsroom and soon a feeling that there just may be a bit more to this story than we in the News Room have been told.
And then the competition starts to find variations on the Climate Change story and some Serious digging gets underway and Editors start getting just a touch twitchy in case they are left out on a limb if this story just happens to be much bigger than they thought and they might just get caught backing the Wrong Horse.
And then they very careful, have it both ways, **** covering terminology raising, just raising the possibility that maybe all is not what it seems on the climate change front.

From there, hang on for the ride!

The media, despite what we may all think. is after all, populated by ordinary, very fallible and often odinery human beings, just like the rest of us!

So Salem,if we apply your logic to everything,we cant believe a word thats printed or broadcast to us!Is that what you are saying?If that is the case,how can you use these "other"sources of information & expect us to accept their validity if what you say is so widespread?

In the rules of engagement with protests & petitions unless thousands of individual complaints are recieved a 100000 signature petition only counts as 1 complaint so how on earth can Councillor Kellaway justly claim MCC represent thousands of complaints?Likewise Redwick,Goldcliff,Bi
shton&Magor,Undy community councils also cannot claim to represent everyone's views!This is always a case of quantity not quality!If NCCC recieve thousands of individual complaints then it will strengthen the protester's case!

Well done Tesco for choosing a "green" option for power supply.

Let' hope they move on to greener vehicles for distribution or delivery. Maybe some of their home delivery vans could be converted to run on bio-methane or batteries?

islwyn09 wrote:
So Salem,if we apply your logic to everything,we cant believe a word thats printed or broadcast to us!Is that what you are saying?If that is the case,how can you use these "other"sources of information & expect us to accept their validity if what you say is so widespread?

I would say that if the Obvious, and Fact-Laden, Cooling phase is considered a Bandwagon then the Fraud driven GW Alarmists is a gravy train overflowing with Clowns
Some of the Clowns, however, are bailing off the out-of-control, soon to be AGW train wreck.
Recently,the BBC - that staunch proponent of AGW questioned the veracity of AGW!
A couple of days ago, the Daily Mail headlined a full colour apparent rejection of Global Warming!
When such heavy weights are jumping on the Cooling "Bandwagon" it shows that the Floodgates are starting to Creak. The sooner that Truth, and the belief in the Scientific method, is restored to its rightful place within accepted Science the sooner the World can properly address the Natural changes in Climate,and mitigate and adapt to its consequences.

jilted john, newport wrote:
"I came to the conclusion years ago that the people on this planet are just brain dead idiots who live for today and hopfully there is a tomorow". Hopefully not all of us are brain dead idiots! At least some of us can think for ourselves - unlike Salem who just pastes stuff copied from lunatic fringe websites.
.
Salem's first rant also appears at:
http://wattsupwithth
at.com/2009/10/13/da
ily-mail-joins-bbc-i
n-writng-about-clima
te-skepticism/
.
And Salem's second rant also appears at:
http://factsnotfanta
sy.blogspot.com/2009
/10/deniers-are-my-h
eroes.html

The problem is that you cannot rationalize with certain sects of the Green Nazi Cult, because every Global Warming issue is hysteria, in which no contrarian debates are allowed; after all, the "Science" is closed. When this type of approach is taken, no Rationale Solutions can be derived. There are elements of the AGW fringe, that are not interested in the environment, as such, but in stifling debate that may offer alternate causes to the modest amount of warming. The conclusions of the IPCC are far, far from being settled, but every Spineless Salivating Politician is now seeing Pound signs from all the Potential Taxes they feel they are now "Morally" obligated to collect, in the name of the Environment. There is a distinction between environmental issues and Global warming/Climate Change. But you would be hard-pressed to identify that difference among the Press, or the many Governments and Institutions all jumping on the GW Bandwagon. It would be naive to believe that altruism is the only motivating factor for theses parties, (i.e. international governments or grant funded consortiums) whose only interest is in the Industrialized Nations dispensing out Bills, every time some poor soul turns on the lights, or the willingness of many Scientists to compromise their Scientific Integrity, by issuing Hyperbolic statements about the Peril of the Planet that they know to be borderline absurd! We all want to seek cleaner alternate energy sources- and independence from Oil/ Petrol products. Note CO2 should not be on the list, since it is a natural by-product of life! But this Religious Fervency, with which many have framed this issue, is Morally Repugnant, and bordering on what the US once called, McCarthyism. It is unfortunate that this brand of Fear Fanaticism has spread to the Masses of People, whose unfortunate circumstances in life are now given a new focal point for their disenfranchisement. It is especially Vile when the message is intended to magnify the Fears of Children, who are the most vulnerable to this Propaganda. Because the Majority of People cannot or are not inclined to delve in the specifics of the Science, we are left to the mercies of Mercenary Scientists, who are paid handsome sums of Grant Money to perpetrate the climatological "Status Quo”. Many of the masses are not even aware, that the IPCC report has downgraded their original assertions from the more exaggerated scenarios, originally espoused, to the more moderate predictions, which really should cause one to wonder- OK- what is the fuss all about??? More and more, there is published data from other sources, other than IPCC, which show evidence that the causes of the Warming/Change have been incorrectly assigned toward Humans. Again, do not count on the many members of the fourth estate to highlight these contradictions, since they are both Lazy and Complicit in the misdirection. The way the argument is framed, rather obnoxiously I would say, is "How can you not accept that the earth is warming?" Well, the argument should be positioned to ask "How can you not accept that earth is not dynamic?" It is apparent to most scientists by now, that the claims from that ridiculous Al Gore movie are way over the top, with most Scientists sheepishly shying away from the outlandish claims made by Mr. Gore. He will perhaps find a better audience among the Mis-Informed Pop Culture Icons and their Worshipers. The unfortunate part of all of this, is that Legitimate Environmental concerns will not be properly addressed, while solutions to non-existent problems are approached with the typical Politically Correct demagoguery of the few, with no consideration of the consequences, intended or otherwise, to the lives of the Billions of Inhabitants of this Planet. The UK is partly to blame for not taking reasoned steps to alleviate the nonsense that is now being projected across the globe with Messianic overtones. Like most of the Civilized World, the fear of the Irrational Diatribes being directed at the more Rational, has over-ridden the quest for the Truth. Even suggesting that the underlying causes of GW are due to the natural undulations of the planet, is akin to Polititians Expenses and Mugging Old People to these People Hating Green Nazis!!!

Hywel Jones wrote:
jilted john, newport wrote:
"I came to the conclusion years ago that the people on this planet are just brain dead idiots who live for today and hopfully there is a tomorow". Hopefully not all of us are brain dead idiots! At least some of us can think for ourselves - unlike Salem who just pastes stuff copied from lunatic fringe websites.
.
Salem's first rant also appears at:
http://wattsupwithth

at.com/2009/10/13/da

ily-mail-joins-bbc-i

n-writng-about-clima

te-skepticism/
.
And Salem's second rant also appears at:
http://factsnotfanta

sy.blogspot.com/2009

/10/deniers-are-my-h

eroes.html

The only Luntics are yourself and the rest of your Green Nazis your House of Cards are tumbling...You and your lunatic fringe have been Crying Wolf for far to to long!!!

Once again you've not answered the question Salem!You gave us your version of War & Peace, but no answer to my question!If the media & internet are so full of inaccuracies then how can anyone trust anything that is out there for human consumption,includin
g your points of reference!Interestin
g you call eco-friendly folk "green nazts"& yet you quote from Hitler's fav newspaper!A chip wrapper so right wing it makes conservatives seem socialist!Odd that!

islwyn09 wrote:
Once again you've not answered the question Salem!You gave us your version of War & Peace, but no answer to my question!If the media & internet are so full of inaccuracies then how can anyone trust anything that is out there for human consumption,includin

g your points of reference!Interestin

g you call eco-friendly folk "green nazts"& yet you quote from Hitler's fav newspaper!A chip wrapper so right wing it makes conservatives seem socialist!Odd that!

Quote..."If the media & internet are so full of inaccuracies then how can anyone trust anything that is out there for human consumption"

You have answered the question yourself!!!

pwharley wrote:
Well done Tesco for choosing a "green" option for power supply. Let' hope they move on to greener vehicles for distribution or delivery. Maybe some of their home delivery vans could be converted to run on bio-methane or batteries?

Your post is typical of the simple minded green brigade who swallow every single bit of information but out by them as fact.

So you are totally familar with the production and transporttation methods of Bio-Fuels? Well clearly you are not.

There is nothing at all green about biofuels. The simple minded green unquestionably accept as fact anything that is says so if it is not coal or oil it is green. Totally daft.

Man made CO2 amounts to less than 1% of the toally emissions so can safely be ignored.

Care to explain as to why 2000 years ago CO2 levels where higher than they are now? Man made where they?


Care to explain why the scientific evidence show that the temperature increase occur before the CO2 ilevels increase?

It's simple really the natural increase in temperature causes the planet to release more C02

So the whole C02 belive of the greens is totaly in arror in any case.

So how can we take your surmons as fact then?You've just shot yourself in the foot old son!

Good on Tesco for going for green energy. Perhaps the people of Redwick will be a little more concerned when sea-levels rise as Redwick is one of the places that will be affected by the rise.

Salem - have a lookat the Artic and tell me the climate isn't changing when there will soon be no ice covering for the summer months. But even if you still are not convinced then isn't it better to try and reduce our carbon output and start changing to green-energy in light of the fact that we are already at 'peak-oil' and in 30-40 years time oil will be a scarce resource. Better to conserve what we have now and make it last longer but introducing green energy than wondering what the hell we're going to do when the last barrel of oil is used up. Of course before then we may already been fighting for water resources.

islwyn09 wrote:
So how can we take your surmons as fact then?You've just shot yourself in the foot old son!

Global Warming/Climate Change Fearmongering has always been about fooling Simpletons and Idiots.

Thanks for making it clear what you are!

Maybe you can buy some Carbon Credits for a Baaaa- gin!

Esta wrote:
Good on Tesco for going for green energy. Perhaps the people of Redwick will be a little more concerned when sea-levels rise as Redwick is one of the places that will be affected by the rise.

Salem - have a lookat the Artic and tell me the climate isn't changing when there will soon be no ice covering for the summer months. But even if you still are not convinced then isn't it better to try and reduce our carbon output and start changing to green-energy in light of the fact that we are already at 'peak-oil' and in 30-40 years time oil will be a scarce resource. Better to conserve what we have now and make it last longer but introducing green energy than wondering what the hell we're going to do when the last barrel of oil is used up. Of course before then we may already been fighting for water resources.

Global Warming Alarmism is an Apocalyptic Myth, surrounding a Political Agenda, cloaked in Science, to paraphrase Winston Churchill. It is nothing more than a variation on the age old theme of "Repent, the end is near". The Green Nazis needs its Apocalyptic myths to further their agendas. As for the Science part, I believe many honest objective Scientists are truly trying to determine the Truth. However, attempting to "Model" Climate may be an impossible task. Remember, no Current Model is accurate at predicting Temperature. They can’t even accurately predict Local Weather patterns, let alone the Global Temperature. The output of the Sun is Variable, the amount of Cosmic Radiation impacting the Earth from other sources is Variable, just those two alone could explain any variance in Temperature we are currently experiencing. And the correlation between CO2 and temperatures is not necessarily a cause. But no amount of reason will stop the GWgravytrain from rolling. There is too much money and too many professional reputations invested. I am all for being a good steward to our planet and finding Alternative Technologies must be an urgent priority. But trying to Threaten People with Extinction to get them to do the right thing is not only Morally Repugnant, but Counter Productive. What happens when your threatened warming does not arrive??? You lose all credibility,you cannot keep on Crying Wolf!!

Esta wrote:
Good on Tesco for going for green energy. Perhaps the people of Redwick will be a little more concerned when sea-levels rise as Redwick is one of the places that will be affected by the rise. Salem - have a lookat the Artic and tell me the climate isn't changing when there will soon be no ice covering for the summer months. But even if you still are not convinced then isn't it better to try and reduce our carbon output and start changing to green-energy in light of the fact that we are already at 'peak-oil' and in 30-40 years time oil will be a scarce resource. Better to conserve what we have now and make it last longer but introducing green energy than wondering what the hell we're going to do when the last barrel of oil is used up. Of course before then we may already been fighting for water resources.

The first flow inyour argument is that so called green energy actually consumes more oil than it saves.

Windmills are useless for producing electricity. The grand amount of energy being produced by all of them amounts to under 1% of the UK's total electricity consumption.

A huge amount of energy and fuel is consumed in installing and maintaining them.

Each turbine needs a base of about a 100 ton of concrete. One of the most environmentally unfriendly material around. Concrete production requiresd large amounts of energy and gives out large amounts of C02. Large amounts of trees & vegatation are destroyed installing them giving further C02 increases

Why are Tesco's so keen to install one. Its not for the electricity which will be negligable but it gets tax breaks and can join the carbon trading scam.

Bobevans wrote:
"Care to explain as to why 2000 years ago CO2 levels where higher than they are now? "
.
Does anyone know why members of the lunatic fringe appear to enjoy spreading such nonsense. No one can ignore the clear evidence that our climate is changing rapidly, and that the change is due to human activity.
.
What motivates members of this small group of people to copy and paste their drivel here?

Hywel Jones wrote:
Bobevans wrote:
"Care to explain as to why 2000 years ago CO2 levels where higher than they are now? "
.
Does anyone know why members of the lunatic fringe appear to enjoy spreading such nonsense. No one can ignore the clear evidence that our climate is changing rapidly, and that the change is due to human activity.
.
What motivates members of this small group of people to copy and paste their drivel here?

Hans Christian Andersen’s The Emperor’s New Clothes ends with...

The Emperor’s new clothes were the finest he had ever had. What a wonderful train! What a perfect fit! No one would let it be thought that he couldn’t see anything, because that would have meant he wasn’t fit for his job, or that he was very stupid. Never had the Emperor’s clothes been such a success.

"BUT HE HASN’T GOT ANYTHING ON!!!" said a little child. "Goodness gracious, do you hear what the little innocent says?" cried the father; and the child’s remark was whispered from one to the other.

"He hasn’t got anything on! There’s a little child saying he hasn’t got anything on I"
"Well, but he hasn’t got anything on!" the people all shouted at last. And the Emperor felt most uncomfortable, for it seemed to him that the people were right. But somehow he thought to himself: "I must go through with it now, procession and all." And he drew himself up still more proudly, while his chamberlains walked after him carrying the train that wasn’t there

Sound like anybody we know???

KEEP CRYING WOLF!!!!!

Salem are you a politician in disguise?As once again you've not answered my question:if all evidence on global warming/climate change etc is false then how can any evidence you present to us all to counter "populist"beliefs be taken seriously?Quid Pro Quo my wee sheep worrier!

I also notice that when you cant make a valid comment you resort to personal remarks to people,a sign of real immaturity!

I also notice that when you cant make a valid comment you resort to personal remarks to people,a sign of real immaturity!

I also notice that when you cant make a valid comment you resort to personal remarks to people,a sign of real immaturity!

islwyn09 wrote:
I also notice that when you cant make a valid comment you resort to personal remarks to people,a sign of real immaturity!

Pot Kettle Black springs to Mind of your above comment

Im still waiting!

How do we know if the pot was black?Was it a kettle or a teasmaid?Which branch of science are you using now Salem?

We can all question all aspects of life & science,like for example are you really from Blackwood & still slag off other valley communities?Are you real or a piece of A.I.thats designed just to annoy folk on a variety of topics?Or are you an oil sheik who fears green issues coz it will kill off his living?Or just someone who likes the sight of his own words in print even though they make no logical sense whatsoever?

Those who think a Science Degree is needed to understand straight forward Logic are fuel for the Puppet-Masters who are scamming the World.

It would be more usefull to pursue those who question the GW Alarmists. There are thousands more Scientists who are opposed to GW Pseudo Science/Religion than who are conned by it. Many have signed published accords.

So – let’s try basic Logic – no need for Science Degrees.
The Last Ice Age peaked around 18,000 years ago.
Then it started to melt and by 10,000 years ago we had what is generally considered to be the end of the Last Ice Age
What caused that to happen?
Answer – Global Warming!!!
Where was man????mmm!
Huddled in Caves and Tropical areas and probably numbered fewer people worldwide than now populates Western Europe (300 million).
Did they cause global warming???? Hardly!!

GW is a long cycle repeating phenomenon. A version of it occurs every 1,500 years and is unstoppable.

Yes, we have had some global warming (and now its cooling) It was seized on as an opportuntiy by Globalists to Manipulate Nations and Global Policies for UN control.
Checkout and Reserch those who have participated in the process and have became critics

Digging deeper you will find that warming precedes CO2 build-up by Hundreds of Years – going back millennia in earth’s record.
Vostock ice cores and others. Check it out.
CO2 does not cause global warming. That is flat out fraud. It is NOT Science by any stretch of the Imagination!!

Vostock ice cores do support global warming and now I don't have a science degree but I can read.

So you are saying that we've got to accept the info you are providing as being accurate while all other sources of data is alarmist exaggerations!Am I right on this point?

Don't expect an answer from Salem any time soon - he is still trying to find an answer on the internet! His last rant was probably copied from:
.
http://www.moneymorn
ing.com/2009/10/02/g
lobal-warming/
.
Weird, eh?

islwyn09 wrote:
So you are saying that we've got to accept the info you are providing as being accurate while all other sources of data is alarmist exaggerations!Am I right on this point?

Its not up to us Skeptics to Prove anything. But you Religious Fanatics to Prove without Doubt that your Theory is Sound which there is no concrete evidence to substantiate the Green Nazis Scaremongerin.....
Hockey Stick Graph...Proved FALSE!
Al Gores Scare Fest.Film Inconvient Truth....Not So True and Grossly over Exagerated!!
Computer Models fed made up DATA to Fit in with the Theory and none of these Computers predicted the Cooling that as been happening since 1998....etc etc etc..
and on these falsehoods you expect us to have Blind Faith and Belief and not to ask Questions of Apocyliptical Catastrophes that May,Might or Could (Using Green Nazi Terminology!) happen in 20,40,50,100,200,100
0,2000 years time..
When your side makes predictions that fail to come true, you lose...
and Obviously since those that support AGW know that they’re lying they cannot and will not explain how they made up their Data and its Processing.
The internet has taken Peer Review to a whole new level, so with the Bull $hit exposed and the World Cooling, the death-throes of this Scam of AGW are upon us.The House of Cards they are aTumbling they are a Crying Wolf a once toooo often!!

Hywel Jones wrote:
Bobevans wrote: "Care to explain as to why 2000 years ago CO2 levels where higher than they are now? " . Does anyone know why members of the lunatic fringe appear to enjoy spreading such nonsense. No one can ignore the clear evidence that our climate is changing rapidly, and that the change is due to human activity. . What motivates members of this small group of people to copy and paste their drivel here?

I put a question to you which your are clearly unable to answer.

Care to also state what percentage of C02 is naturally generated and what is man made?

I doubt you will know. You are one of these people that just jump on any bandwagon that come along.

You actually do not have an facts to suport your claim do you?

Salem you're approaching the overwhelming conclusions of the international scientific community the wrong way. “Science” does not have a standpoint, it does not have an inherent set of predispositions, it processes information and views and in an almost Darwinian fashion weeds out the weakest arguments. This includes the conspiracy-like blogs you seem to be so fond of (and seemingly plagiarise.) If any of these theories stood up to any sort of criticism then they would surely be incorporated into the scientific community. In some small way I agree with you that there are probably people pushing the global warming issue for their own gain (be it political or financial) but there are surely people on the other side trying to dampen the argument (e.g. industrialists.) Science will always be influenced to some extent by outside influences (again financial/political) but when the evidence becomes as overwhelming as it has for global warming you need to leave your X-files like conspiracy theories to fiction.

username2 wrote:
Salem you're approaching the overwhelming conclusions of the international scientific community the wrong way. “Science” does not have a standpoint, it does not have an inherent set of predispositions, it processes information and views and in an almost Darwinian fashion weeds out the weakest arguments. This includes the conspiracy-like blogs you seem to be so fond of (and seemingly plagiarise.) If any of these theories stood up to any sort of criticism then they would surely be incorporated into the scientific community. In some small way I agree with you that there are probably people pushing the global warming issue for their own gain (be it political or financial) but there are surely people on the other side trying to dampen the argument (e.g. industrialists.) Science will always be influenced to some extent by outside influences (again financial/political) but when the evidence becomes as overwhelming as it has for global warming you need to leave your X-files like conspiracy theories to fiction.

username2 like I stated above there is no concrete evidence, the whole Global Warming Alarmism is based on a Tissue of lies i.e.."This is our Theory gives us the Facts that fit it"
Ever since the Green movement as been around they have made and predicted wild Apocyliptic accusations of Doomsday scenarios none of which have materialised...as I keep on saying you can only keep on CRYING WOLF for so long

You constantly refer to other scientific sources tp prop up your argument,again I ask you how can we take YOUR evidence as being credible?You have poo-pooed a lot of current thinking which you claim is all a conspiracy between "green nazis"& media!So how can the counter argument be taken seriously too,after all thats all to be found online!Or is it a case of its only right coz crazy little salem says so?

What a paranoid lot! No Wonder the Earth is in such a state.

Bobevans wrote:
"2000 years ago, CO2 levels were higher than they are now".
.
OK then Bobevans, please do tell us where you got this bit of nonsense from? (I'm sure you were dying for me to ask.)

The scientific evidence for this is from core samples taken and no one is disputing this.

The other inconvienent argument that C02 is causing climate chang is that from 2001 to date temperatures have been falling. Again this is a scientific fact.

It is very difficult to predict climate change. Only 15 years ago "they" were talking about summer droughts and hosepipe bans. The last 3 summers have been consistantly wetter than I can remember. 15 years in 8 billion years does not help with predictions. CO2 emmissions by human activity has increased in the last 50 years or so. Millions of years ago O2 levels were much higher than they are now mainly due to increased density of plants. What the planet contained then is similar to what we have now just in different chemical arrangements. Most ecosystems and physiological systems are tightly buffered and slight alterations can have significant effects. For instance, if your fasting blood sugar is 5 mM (0.9 g per litre of blood) you are normal, but if your fasting sugar goes up to 7 mM (1.26 g per litre of blood) you are diabetic and if it goes down to 2 mM (0.36 g per litre of blood) you will probably be in a coma and may die. My point is that much of the life on earth is in a fine buffered balance.

There have been many examples of global events that have drastically changed the make up of life on Earth and that is only disputed by a few. However, life has always adapted and overcome (we are here now).

My main point is that crude oil is going to run out, natural gas is going to run out and there is only a finite amount of coal. The human population of the earth is too high and it is rising. Diminishing resources and increasing populations are not sustainable in any biological system. Irrespective of global warming, myth or inevitable truth, we are not sustainable. Land that we grow food on cannot be used for biofuels and the same is true vice versa. These are conflicts which are nations are fighting over.
Solutions to our problems require technology and technology uses fuels (even nuclear energy has finite resources nevermind any other problems). The question arises what do we choose to use our fossil fuels for?

Salem wrote:

username2 wrote: Salem you're approaching the overwhelming conclusions of the international scientific community the wrong way. “Science” does not have a standpoint, it does not have an inherent set of predispositions, it processes information and views and in an almost Darwinian fashion weeds out the weakest arguments. This includes the conspiracy-like blogs you seem to be so fond of (and seemingly plagiarise.) If any of these theories stood up to any sort of criticism then they would surely be incorporated into the scientific community. In some small way I agree with you that there are probably people pushing the global warming issue for their own gain (be it political or financial) but there are surely people on the other side trying to dampen the argument (e.g. industrialists.) Science will always be influenced to some extent by outside influences (again financial/political) but when the evidence becomes as overwhelming as it has for global warming you need to leave your X-files like conspiracy theories to fiction.

username2 like I stated above there is no concrete evidence, the whole Global Warming Alarmism is based on a Tissue of lies i.e.."This is our Theory gives us the Facts that fit it" Ever since the Green movement as been around they have made and predicted wild Apocyliptic accusations of Doomsday scenarios none of which have materialised...as I keep on saying you can only keep on CRYING WOLF for so long

That simply isn’t true Salem, there is a wealth of concrete evidence. I admire the tenacity in your argument but at some point you have to open your eyes. Why do you believe your conspiracy blogs and not conclusive evidence from established international scientific organisations? These aren’t green organisations they are NEUTRAL scientific organisations with no agenda.

"Ever since the Green movement as been around they have made and predicted wild Apocyliptic accusations of Doomsday scenarios none of which have materialised"

Name one Salem.

username2 wrote:

Salem wrote:

username2 wrote: Salem you're approaching the overwhelming conclusions of the international scientific community the wrong way. “Science” does not have a standpoint, it does not have an inherent set of predispositions, it processes information and views and in an almost Darwinian fashion weeds out the weakest arguments. This includes the conspiracy-like blogs you seem to be so fond of (and seemingly plagiarise.) If any of these theories stood up to any sort of criticism then they would surely be incorporated into the scientific community. In some small way I agree with you that there are probably people pushing the global warming issue for their own gain (be it political or financial) but there are surely people on the other side trying to dampen the argument (e.g. industrialists.) Science will always be influenced to some extent by outside influences (again financial/political) but when the evidence becomes as overwhelming as it has for global warming you need to leave your X-files like conspiracy theories to fiction.

username2 like I stated above there is no concrete evidence, the whole Global Warming Alarmism is based on a Tissue of lies i.e.."This is our Theory gives us the Facts that fit it" Ever since the Green movement as been around they have made and predicted wild Apocyliptic accusations of Doomsday scenarios none of which have materialised...as I keep on saying you can only keep on CRYING WOLF for so long

That simply isn’t true Salem, there is a wealth of concrete evidence. I admire the tenacity in your argument but at some point you have to open your eyes. Why do you believe your conspiracy blogs and not conclusive evidence from established international scientific organisations? These aren’t green organisations they are NEUTRAL scientific organisations with no agenda.

"Ever since the Green movement as been around they have made and predicted wild Apocyliptic accusations of Doomsday scenarios none of which have materialised"

Name one Salem.

1970's...Like they are doing today we were all going to freeze with the "Predicted" manmade Iceage...never happened!!
Stop being sucked into this GW Bull $hit, its now a Multi Billion Dollar Industry and Growing and that was the whole point. You need to ask yourself why Al Gore and his team of IPCC Psuedo scientists will not have a Public Debate with some of the Worlds Leading Scientists and other Experts relating to the Issues???
All of us just love World ending scenarios. I think it's part of  the Human Condition:We all have a Paranoid feeling of Dread about the World coming to an Apocalyptic end.

But I'm afraid the news is really much worst, you're gonna be dead one day and there ain't a thing you can do about it and the world really won't miss you at all.

So why not relax and enjoy yourself, they predict the end of our galaxy in some 3 billion years anyway

islwyn09 wrote:
You constantly refer to other scientific sources tp prop up your argument,again I ask you how can we take YOUR evidence as being credible?You have poo-pooed a lot of current thinking which you claim is all a conspiracy between "green nazis"& media!So how can the counter argument be taken seriously too,after all thats all to be found online!Or is it a case of its only right coz crazy little salem says so?

The truth is the Science and the FACTS are not established, and their not sure about ANY part of climatology, which is so complex

Global Warming is ALL about Computer Models, basically High-Speed Guess Work or if you put Rubbish you'll get Rubbish Out

But the Green Nazis have turned it into a Delusional Cult, an Emotional High Piched Scream without Foundation. However, very Human!!!

JUST remember; Humans are but 5 chromosomes removed from Chimpanzees and People like you..LOL!!

Just saying "1970's" is not an argument Salem. You're relying on conjecture once again. Are you suggesting that in the 1970's serious scientists predicated a "manmade Iceage" within 40 years?

You seem to have spent a lot of time looking into this but don’t you ever feel the truth may just be staring you right in the face?

Bobevans wrote:
"2000 years ago, CO2 levels were higher than they are now".
.
But you still haven't said where you read this bit of nonsense. We're still waiting . . .
.
Do you even know what the atmospheric CO2 concentration was 2000 years ago?

Salem the only primate on here is you!You are trying hard to make anargument that simpley isnt there!As several posters have outed you as a serial plagerist then its you thats the monkey as you "ape"serious scientists!On an earlier comment of yours im far from being a christian old son,im more a pagan worshiper being @ 1 with my surroundings thats why I care about the enviroment,not because of some impending apocalypse but I just want to live in a cleaner healthier world!If thats being wrong,then i dont want to be right!

username2 wrote:
Just saying "1970's" is not an argument Salem. You're relying on conjecture once again. Are you suggesting that in the 1970's serious scientists predicated a "manmade Iceage" within 40 years?

You seem to have spent a lot of time looking into this but don’t you ever feel the truth may just be staring you right in the face?

So lets see what we actual know... We know that the Earth has undergone many Climate Changes that Dwarf what we saw in the latter part of last Century. We know CO2 does not drive Temperature but is rather a result of Temperature Increases. We know the Earth has been cooling for at least the last 11 years now. We know the Sun is the energy source of our "Solar System" and we know that it has fluctuations and Cycles of Energy Output. We know that over 1000 years ago it was much warmer than Today.So with all this knowledge why would we resort to Might Happen,Could Happen, May Happen isn't that also conjecture and Pure Speculation???

The Predictions of Apolyptic Catastrophies has been the Modus Operanda of the Green Nazis since their inception. Next Ice Age, The Club of Rome, the Population Bomb...etc etc

Each campaign got bigger and better, the Green Nazis learned how to Lie better and Manipulate the Media.

This time is different. The Outright Lies and Deceptions by the IPCC, the massive opportunity cost of the Hundreds of Billions of Research Money diverted from Productive Scientists to those "Scientists" willing to compromise their Integrity for Fame and Monitary Gain and like the Politicians Expenses - people are getting pi$$ed off about the whole Scam!!

Quote from..From the Club of Rome’s “The First Global Revolution” p. 71,75 1993...

"The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. …The real enemy then is humanity itself.
Democracy is no longer well suited for the tasks ahead."

islwyn09 wrote:
Salem the only primate on here is you!You are trying hard to make anargument that simpley isnt there!As several posters have outed you as a serial plagerist then its you thats the monkey as you "ape"serious scientists!On an earlier comment of yours im far from being a christian old son,im more a pagan worshiper being @ 1 with my surroundings thats why I care about the enviroment,not because of some impending apocalypse but I just want to live in a cleaner healthier world!If thats being wrong,then i dont want to be right!

OK..Imbecile I shall put this into short simple terms for your one Neandthall Brain Cell to understand....I cant ABIDE BEING SCAMMED AND LIED TO!!!!
I have no problems of not polluting our enviroment but all this Bull$hit is one big con and scam its all about Control and Money nothing more and nothing less..Reserch and find out for yourself even parts of the Main Stream Media are starting to ask Questions.......are you a Socialist!!

OK Salem let's try this once again, do you have evidence that in the 1970's major scientific agencies predicted a "manmae Iceage" within 40 years or like almost everything else you've said so far, is it pure guesswork on your part?

From the Independent 20-Oct-09
A frozen lake on a remote island off Canada's northern coast has yielded remarkable insights into how the Arctic climate has changed dramatically over 50 years.


Muddy sediment from the bottom of the lake, some of it 200,000 years old, shows that Baffin Island, one of the most inhospitable places on Earth, has undergone an unprecedented warming over the past half-century. Scientists believe the temperature rise is probably due to human-induced warming. It has more than offset a natural cooling trend which began 8,000 years ago.

Instead of cooling at a rate of minus 0.C every 1,000 years – a trend that was expected to continue for another 4,000 years because of well-known changes to the Earth's solar orbit – Baffin Island, like the rest of the Arctic, has begun to get warmer, especially since 1950. The Arctic is now about 1.C warmer than it was in 1900, confirming that the region is warming faster than most other parts of the world.
Baffin Island, the largest island in the Arctic Canadian Archipelago, is subjected to prevailing northerly winds that keep average temperatures at about minus 8.5C, well below similar Arctic locations at a comparable latitude. Polar bears, arctic fox and arctic hares walk the island's territory while narwhal, walrus and beluga whale patrol its coastline.

The island is dotted with lakes, the bottoms of which have been periodically scoured by glaciers with each passing ice age. However, scientists have found that the sediments at the bottom of some of the lakes, which build up each year rather like tree rings, have survived this scouring process intact.

This has enabled the scientists to take core samples going back tens of thousands of years. One such lake on Baffin Island, known as CF8, has been found to have layers of sediment dating back 200,000 years, which makes it the oldest lake sediment bored from any glaciated parts of Canada or Greenland, according to the study published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

It is the CF8 lake that has provided scientists with the sediment core showing the unprecedented warming of Baffin Island over the past few decades, compared with a time span going back 200,000 years, a period which included two ice ages and three interglacial periods – and roughly the time that Homo sapiens has been on earth.

"The past few decades have been unique in the past 200,000 years in terms of the changes we see in the biology and chemistry recorded in the cores," said Yarrow Axford of the University of Colorado at Boulder. "We see clear evidence for warming in one of the most remote places on earth at a time when the Arctic should be cooling because of natural processes." The scientists found that certain cold-adapted organisms in the layers of sediment have decreased in frequency since about 1950. Larvae from species of Arctic midge, which only live in cold conditions, have abruptly declined and two species in particular have disappeared altogether.

Meanwhile, a species of lake alga or diatom that is better suited to warmer conditions has increased significantly over the same period, indicating longer periods when the lake's surface was free of ice, the scientists said. Other sediment measurements support a dramatic reversal of the natural cooling trend, they said.

As part of a 21,000-year cycle, the Arctic has been receiving progressively less summertime energy from the Sun for the past 8,000 years because of a well-established "wobble" in the Earth's solar rotation – the Earth is now 0.6 million miles further from the Sun during an Arctic summer solstice than it was in 1BC. This decline will not reverse for another 4,000 years, but changes to the climate of Baffin Island show that the cooling it should have caused has gone into reverse in the past few decades.

A separate team of scientists analysing Arctic lakes in Alaska found a similar warming trend in recent years compared to sediment records going back a few thousand years. They, too, concluded that the warming was unprecedented and could be explained by human activities, namely the build of man-made carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

"The amount of energy we're getting from the Sun in the 20th century continued to go down, but the temperature went up higher than anything we've seen in the last 2,000 years," said Nicholas McKay of the University of Arizona in Tucson .

"The 20th century is the first century for which how much energy we're getting from the Sun is no longer the most important thing governing the temperature of the Arctic," said Dr McKay, when the study was published last month in the journal Science.

username2 wrote:
OK Salem let's try this once again, do you have evidence that in the 1970's major scientific agencies predicted a "manmae Iceage" within 40 years or like almost everything else you've said so far, is it pure guesswork on your part?

Here is a quote from Newsweek magazine....
“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.”
A headline in the New York Times reads: “Climate Changes Endanger World’s Food Output.”
And another quote from Time Magazine...
“As they review the bizarre and unpredictable weather pattern of the past several years, a growing number of scientists are beginning to suspect that many seemingly contradictory meteorological fluctuations are actually part of a global climatic upheaval.”
All of this sounds very ominous. That is, until you realize that the three quotes I just read were from articles in 1975 editions of Newsweek Magazine and The New York Times, and Time Magazine in 1974. They weren’t referring to global warming; they were warning of a coming ice age.

Let me repeat, all three of those quotes were published in the 1970’s and warned of a coming ice age.

In addition to global cooling fears, Time Magazine has also reported on global warming. Here is an example:

“ who claim that winters were harder when they were boys are quite right… weathermen have no doubt that the world at least for the time being is growing warmer.”

Before you think that this is just another example of the media promoting Vice President Gore’s movie, you need to know that the quote I just read you from Time Magazine was not a recent quote; it was from January 2, 1939.

Yes, in 1939. Nine years before Vice President Gore was born and over three decades before Time Magazine began hyping a coming ice age and almost five decades before they returned to hyping global warming.
Time Magazine in 1951 pointed to receding permafrost in Russia as proof that the planet was warming.

In 1952, the New York Times noted that the “trump card” of global warming “has been the melting glaciers.”
There are many more examples of the media and scientists flip-flopping between warming and cooling scares.

Here is a quote from the New York Times reporting on fears of an approaching ice age.

“Geologists Think the World May be Frozen Up Again.”

That sentence appeared over 100 years ago in the February 24, 1895 edition of the New York Times.

Let me repeat. 1895, not 1995.

A front page article in the October 7, 1912 New York Times, just a few months after the Titanic struck an iceberg and sank, declared that a prominent professor “Warns Us of an Encroaching Ice Age.”

The very same day in 1912, the Los Angeles Times ran an article warning that the “Human race will have to fight for its existence against cold.” An August 10, 1923 Washington Post article declared: “Ice Age Coming Here.”
The very same day in 1912, the Los Angeles Times ran an article warning that the “Human race will have to fight for its existence against cold.” An August 10, 1923 Washington Post article declared: “Ice Age Coming Here.”

By the 1930’s, the media took a break from reporting on the coming ice age and instead switched gears to promoting global warming:

“America in Longest Warm Spell Since 1776; Temperature Line Records a 25-year Rise” stated an article in the New York Times on March 27, 1933. The media of yesteryear was also not above injecting large amounts of fear and alarmism into their climate articles.
An August 9, 1923 front page article in the Chicago Tribune declared:

“Scientist Says Arctic Ice Will Wipe Out Canada.” The article quoted a Yale University professor who predicted that large parts of Europe and Asia would be “wiped out” and Switzerland would be “entirely obliterated.”

A December 29, 1974 New York Times article on global cooling reported that climatologists believed “the facts of the present climate change are such that the most optimistic experts would assign near certainty to major crop failure in a decade.”

The article also warned that unless government officials reacted to the coming catastrophe, “mass deaths by starvation and probably in anarchy and violence” would result. In 1975, the New York Times reported that “A major cooling widely considered to be inevitable.” These past predictions of doom have a familiar ring, don’t they? They sound strikingly similar to our modern media promotion of former Vice president’s brand of climate alarmism.

After more than a century of alternating between global cooling and warming, one would think that this media history would serve a cautionary tale for today’s voices in the media and scientific community who are promoting yet another round of eco-Apocolyptic Doom!!

Ha!Ha!Ha!You dont like being scammed & lied to,now you know how the rest of us feel about you & your inane babblings!I too dont like being lied to but my problem lies with multi-national companies who think its OK to pollute the world we live in & call it progress!They employ teams of "scientists"who peddle lies to justify their companies activities & its these tossers who are clouding the issue with claims & counter-claims!If anyone is a "nazi"its these so-called scientists who sacrifice their profession's reputation for 30 pieces of silver!

islwyn09 wrote:
Ha!Ha!Ha!You dont like being scammed & lied to,now you know how the rest of us feel about you & your inane babblings!I too dont like being lied to but my problem lies with multi-national companies who think its OK to pollute the world we live in & call it progress!They employ teams of "scientists"who peddle lies to justify their companies activities & its these tossers who are clouding the issue with claims & counter-claims!If anyone is a "nazi"its these so-called scientists who sacrifice their profession's reputation for 30 pieces of silver!

Take your Blinkers off dig a little deeper and you will discover alot of these so called Multi Nationals and Bankers along with Goverments are Perpetuating this Scam...follow the Money!!!

It could be worse it could another housing development just ask your Ringland neighbours about that, their councillors don’t listen to them either. They don’t think green they build on green.

Bobevans wrote:
"2000 years ago, CO2 levels were higher than they are now".
.
But you still haven't said where you read this bit of nonsense.

And, we're still waiting . . .

Ignoring the global warming fact-or-fiction debate for a minute, how about the benefit of reducing our country's reliance on a limited number of (dwindling) fuel sources, especially those controlled by other countries, who might wish to turn off the tap one day.

As for comments on how much energy it takes to make a wind turbine in the first place, this is a fair point to an extent. But only if comparing like for like - how much energy does it take to build a coal fired, gas fired or nuclear power station? A huge amount I suspect.

Just my thoughts for anyone open-minded enough to contemplate another opinion, even if after thought you disagree with me.

Spot on, Charlie.
.
Surely, the climate change deniers don't also deny peak oil and peak gas?

We al know where the money ends up,my concern is that as custodians of this planet of ours we should be more careful with its resources,hence windfarms,hopefully a tidal barrage,solar panels to be as commonplace as sky dishes,less pollution from cars,less cars on road,more public transport not much to ask is it?So where's the problem in that Salem?Or are you sceptical that pollution even exsists?

To return to original topic,if Tesco has ignored local residents' views then shame on them,but we must temper this with the acknowledgment that a great many folk may agree with Tesco's new green credentials,one wont know full facts unless a referendum was taken within affected area,instead of letting politicians sound off to media with inaccuracies & exaggerations!Let the people speak!

All: Sorry to take this thread off topic once again - but I can't help but note this.

Salem: It's a bit rich for you to go around labelling other people as green 'Nazis' when your own views on transgendered people (as expressed in previous posts - at least one of which that was contrary to the rules of this forum) are exactly the same as those of the actual Nazis.

Nice spotting Kate,by all means interupt all you want my love,its a free country!(But dont tell Salem!He'll go NUTS!)Yes he talks about nazis & then goes on to quote the Daily Mail!Say no more!

islwyn09 wrote:
Nice spotting Kate,by all means interupt all you want my love,its a free country!(But dont tell Salem!He'll go NUTS!)Yes he talks about nazis & then goes on to quote the Daily Mail!Say no more!

Everyone is entitled to be Stupid, but you abuse the Privilege If you're gonna act like a Dick you should wear a condom on your head so you can at least look like one !!!

Katie T wrote:
All: Sorry to take this thread off topic once again - but I can't help but note this.

Salem: It's a bit rich for you to go around labelling other people as green 'Nazis' when your own views on transgendered people (as expressed in previous posts - at least one of which that was contrary to the rules of this forum) are exactly the same as those of the actual Nazis.

And your point is??????????????????
????????????????????
????????????????

Well, my point Salem, is that it's a wee bit hypocritical to go around denouncing people as 'Nazis' when it's your views on certain topics that actually have more in common with the Nazis.

Moreover, it seems to me that you resort to a lot of needless, immature name-calling on these threads - e.g. you've called islwyn09 a 'Dick' on this one because you have a different opinion, as well as calling me a 'pervert' (totally out of the blue without you and I even previously interacting - simply because you didn't like it when I mentioned I was trans) on another one.

Is there really any need to be personal?

Taking things to this stupid level of personal abuse is detracting from the real issues. Makes you wonder if those of you commenting really do care about the major problems at stake?

Shame on the Argus for allowing this comments page to degenerate to this level.

The Scientific evidence is clearly one of not supporting the case that C02 causes global warming.

Some of the wild claims being made by some people are totaly daft. They have come out with Sea Levels will rise by 6'. Pretty impressive. THe slight problem is that there is not enough water on the planet to cause that.

Temperatures will increase dramaticaly within 20 years. Well no the planet is currently actualy cooling

Even more odd are the claims C02 cause temperatures rises. Every single bit of scientific evidence shows the temperature changes cause theC02 increase

The other slight problem with the environmentalists case is that man made C02 accounts for about 1% of the plannets C02 emissions so it is insignificant , even more so when you see how small the change has been over the last 100 years

Katie T wrote:
Well, my point Salem, is that it's a wee bit hypocritical to go around denouncing people as 'Nazis' when it's your views on certain topics that actually have more in common with the Nazis.

Moreover, it seems to me that you resort to a lot of needless, immature name-calling on these threads - e.g. you've called islwyn09 a 'Dick' on this one because you have a different opinion, as well as calling me a 'pervert' (totally out of the blue without you and I even previously interacting - simply because you didn't like it when I mentioned I was trans) on another one.

Is there really any need to be personal?

So you dont have an oppinion on this Thread only Character assination of other Contributors like your sidekick Islwyn I think the pair of you want to seriously GROW UP!!!!!