Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » October’s PB Poll Average: UKIP hit record high, Lab hit re

245

Comments

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624
    Tapestry said:

    The planes crashing into the towers were not all you imagine either.
    http://tapnewswire.com/2010/11/planes-hitting-twin-towers-were-computer-graphics/

    My god, the people I knew WHO ACTUALLY SAW IT AND WHOM I TALKED TO ON THE DAY ITSELF MUST BE CIA PLANTS
  • stodge said:

    SeanT said:


    I never mentioned a Tory "sweep to victory". I think it's entirely possible Labour could go sub-30 but the Tories will only get a measly 32 or 33, and we have a very hung parliament, with the two parties practically tied on seats. Or Labour just ahead.

    FWIW a Baxtering of this result

    Tories: 33
    Labour: 30
    LD: 10
    UKIP; 14

    gives no overall majority, but it does give Labour a plurality - by two seats

    That said, there are now so many imponderables in the next election - from UKIP to Scotland - Baxtering is virtually useless.

    But if I was a politician right now I'd be slightly more depressed if I was a Labour MP than a Tory MP.

    I'm not convinced the Conservatives won't finish around 30 as well - so it could be 30-30-15-10 (Con-Lab-UKIP-LD) with significant totals for the SNP and the Greens as well. On that basis, Labour will probably the largest party and probably able to form a minority Government.

    I generally agree with these points and remain unconvinced by all these polls. I still think the governing party, that is Tories, will, as in most elections, narrow the gap once people start to seriously think about the election in new year. I know this is shaping up to be the weirdest election in decades, but I still think the Con-Lab polls will narrow in time.
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    edited November 2014
    Tapestry said:

    The planes crashing into the towers were not all you imagine either.
    http://tapnewswire.com/2010/11/planes-hitting-twin-towers-were-computer-graphics/

    ... and everyone on the ground watched holograms projected from the HAARP.

    You do post some utter nonsense Tapestry.

  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,326
    Tapestry said:

    Hello, Tapestry. We were discussing the mechanism whereby the Twin Towers collapsed on the previous thread. Do you have a view? I know you hold views which may be considered 'unconventional' by some. Anorak.

    OK. The Twin Towers fell down and the material from which they were constructed disappeared into dust. You could actually see steel beams 'dustifying' as they fell. The streets filled with paper showing no signs of fire, and dust. There was only one tenth of the wreckage on the ground that should have been there.

    Another unusual phenomenon was that of toasted cars - melted down one side but completely intact on the other. Also seen were inverted cars which flew up in the air and landed on their backs.

    All you can say for sure that these things were never seen before. The most likely explanation is that this was a directed energy weapon of some kind.

    http://tapnewswire.com/2011/11/dr-judy-wood-where-did-the-towers-go/

    When I burn big pieces of wood I find that at the end there is nothing but dust or ash as it's commonly known. I can even see the wood "dustifying" as it falls into the ash pan. Even quite a prolonged fire of some very big bits of wood will result in quite a small amount of ash. Amazing how a big log can turn into a very small amount of a different substance, much less than "should have been there". It's probably because of a directed energy weapon of some kind, or match, as it's known in our household.

  • Mr. Antifrank, and I could probably find people who believe homosexuality is a mortal sin and who believe in global warming too. But what's that got to do with the price of fish?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,704

    dr_spyn said:

    ah, how predictable.

    Laurie Penny ‏@PennyRed 21m21 minutes ago
    I'm actually from Lewes. I grew up there and went to Bonfire Night every year. I'm appalled by the Salmond effigy. #LewesBonfire

    She does have a point - the effigy as far too flattering.
    Lewes does have an appalling history of selecting bonfire effigies. IIRC it's not so long that they used the Pope.

    I'm not a Catholic, or even a Christian, but .....
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    rcs1000 said:

    Tapestry said:

    The planes crashing into the towers were not all you imagine either.
    http://tapnewswire.com/2010/11/planes-hitting-twin-towers-were-computer-graphics/

    My god, the people I knew WHO ACTUALLY SAW IT AND WHOM I TALKED TO ON THE DAY ITSELF MUST BE CIA PLANTS
    DON'T YOU KNOW? Hypnotic programming on the TV, fracking gases in doughnuts and chemtrails caused mass hallucinations.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    The Tories clocked 30.7% in 1997, 31.7% in 2001 and 32.4% in 2005. Going under thirty would be a new experience.

    Foot and Brown have both taken Labour under, and Kinnock was only just above that mark in 1987.

    If you looked at Ed as a leader, and then compared him to those three, you'd have to say under 30 is comfortably achievable as Brown and Kinnock were both superior to him.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,534

    Mr. Antifrank, and I could probably find people who believe homosexuality is a mortal sin and who believe in global warming too. But what's that got to do with the price of fish?

    TBH, I couldn't give a toss about global warming. It makes no difference to me whether a politician believes in it or not.
  • NinoinozNinoinoz Posts: 1,312

    antifrank said:

    Interesting to note that today not one of the people deriding the 911truther theories has been called an ignoramus.

    On a site where posters have regularly called into question the holocaust, global warming and the rules of international law in areas where Russia is interested, I expect that the response of most of those of us who are busy is to sigh at another front opened by the confederacy of dunces and to move on.
    I was called an utter ignoramus yesterday for daring to suggest that MikeK might not want to promote the writing (on a different topic) of a 911 truther. That attack on me has not been withdrawn despite my clear explanation of why I had made such a suggestion to MikeK.
    I've been thinking about your logic. How about this for an example?

    Nick Griffin= Racist. I think we can all agree on this.

    Nick Griffin= Brave defender of White girls from evil Muslim Asians. He got prosecuted for that; the only undeniably true statement I've ever heard from him.

    It is perfectly possible to be completely wrong on one thing, but completely right on another.
  • dr_spyn said:

    ah, how predictable.

    Laurie Penny ‏@PennyRed 21m21 minutes ago
    I'm actually from Lewes. I grew up there and went to Bonfire Night every year. I'm appalled by the Salmond effigy. #LewesBonfire

    She does have a point - the effigy as far too flattering.
    Lewes does have an appalling history of selecting bonfire effigies. IIRC it's not so long that they used the Pope.

    I'm not a Catholic, or even a Christian, but .....
    In fairness, that does at least have some residual connection with Guy Fawkes Night, which was promoted as state-sponsored anti-Catholicism in order to get the English public to warm to their new Scottish king.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Itajai said:

    FalseFlag said:

    Socrates said:

    Socrates said:


    I an not 'pro Putin'. Vladimir Putin is undoubtedly ruthless and growingly autocratic, but the caricature in the media of a Dick Darstardly style villain who invades on a whim is simply silly. Even Hitler had a game plan. Do I believe Putin's game plan is to control and dominate our country and my life? Nope. Is there anything to be gained from antagonising him? Nope. Are we doing it because America (who recently called him the biggest threat to humanity) are doing it? Yep. Is this an area where their interests and ours are misaligned, therefore we should shut our traps and see which way things go? Yep.

    Britain's and America's (and France's and Germany's) interest in Ukraine is entirely aligned. It is moral and good to encourage them to move to a democratic system, and it is very dangerous to allow nations to invade and annex part of their neighbours.
    It was hardly a move toward a democratic system to unseat the democratically elected (UN observed, so don't try it) President.

    Our policy toward Russia should be one of caution, cordial relations, and positive engagement, based on our scary energy needs.

    Here's our policy toward Saudi Arabia, a far worse and more pernicious energy rich country:

    http://www.spa.gov.sa/galupload/normal/119880_1352213987_9161.jpg

    America may not need Russian gas, and that's fine -their policy toward Russia is a reckless one of ramping up the rhetoric and seeking conflict. We should not be joining them -it is utterly counter to our own needs.
    There was civilian unrest due to the fact the President ordered snipers to kill unarmed protesters on the streets. As a result, the president skipped town. He was voted as having left power by the democratically elected parliament, and fresh elections were announced. None of that justifies for a second Russia annexing parts of the country.
    Sorry but I won't allow that sniper claim to go down the memory hole. A deeply disturbing event.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2573923/Estonian-Foreign-Ministry-confirms-authenticity-leaked-phone-call-discussing-Kiev-snipers-shot-protesters-possibly-hired-Ukraines-new-leaders.html

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f94_1399830458&comments=1

    That no one talks about MH17 tells you all you need to know.
    Estonia is not exactly a Russia-friendly country.
    Plenty of people talked about MH17. It was shot down by Russia-backed militias using weaponry stolen from the Ukrainian government.
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,067

    Mr. Antifrank, I think it's ridiculous to put the Holocaust alongside the contentious issue of global warming, and the contentious issue of the politics relating to the Ukraine/Russia situation.

    It's a small step away from the uncouth 'denier' language.

    What's contentious about global warming?
  • Labour reshuffle.
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    Ninoinoz said:

    antifrank said:

    Interesting to note that today not one of the people deriding the 911truther theories has been called an ignoramus.

    On a site where posters have regularly called into question the holocaust, global warming and the rules of international law in areas where Russia is interested, I expect that the response of most of those of us who are busy is to sigh at another front opened by the confederacy of dunces and to move on.
    I was called an utter ignoramus yesterday for daring to suggest that MikeK might not want to promote the writing (on a different topic) of a 911 truther. That attack on me has not been withdrawn despite my clear explanation of why I had made such a suggestion to MikeK.
    I've been thinking about your logic. How about this for an example?

    Nick Griffin= Racist. I think we can all agree on this.

    Nick Griffin= Brave defender of White girls from evil Muslim Asians. He got prosecuted for that; the only undeniably true statement I've ever heard from him.

    It is perfectly possible to be completely wrong on one thing, but completely right on another.
    You haven't been thinking about my logic.

    My logic was that many 'truthers' connect the whole thing to a Zionist conspiracy (not that I know that this particular writer does) and that MikeK might want to think twice about promoting such a writer's views, given his history.
  • HughHugh Posts: 955

    Mr. Antifrank, I think it's ridiculous to put the Holocaust alongside the contentious issue of global warming, and the contentious issue of the politics relating to the Ukraine/Russia situation.

    It's a small step away from the uncouth 'denier' language.

    Lol.

    Conspiracy theories are nuts, unless it's my conspiracy theory.

    Climate science denial, Holocaust denial, 9/11 denial, all the same.

    Politically / ideologically motivated delusion.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    Socrates said:

    FalseFlag said:
    An Estonian source reported the conspiracy theories circulating on the ground in Ukraine? Oh, that must mean the conspiracy theory is true!
    Estonia are in the EU and in NATO.

    FPT:
    What was your reaction to Israel's unilateral annexation of East Jerusalem and the Golan in 1980-1981?
    It was immoral and illegitimate.
  • Mr. (or Miss?) S, whether it's occurring and, if it is, whether that's due to the natural change in the climate which has always happened or largely/wholly due to human industrial activity.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Is it not possible for the civilised world to tell Pakistan to go away and come back when it has grown up...to stop trading with them ... to stop their people spreading their religious poison aound the world... come back when it has stopped killing people who believe in a different religion..Pakistan is an abomination.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    antifrank said:

    dr_spyn said:

    ah, how predictable.

    Laurie Penny ‏@PennyRed 21m21 minutes ago
    I'm actually from Lewes. I grew up there and went to Bonfire Night every year. I'm appalled by the Salmond effigy. #LewesBonfire

    She does have a point - the effigy as far too flattering.
    Lewes does have an appalling history of selecting bonfire effigies. IIRC it's not so long that they used the Pope.

    I'm not a Catholic, or even a Christian, but .....
    In fairness, that does at least have some residual connection with Guy Fawkes Night, which was promoted as state-sponsored anti-Catholicism in order to get the English public to warm to their new Scottish king.
    so how come when the good folks at Lewes try to warm the current scottish king there's such a fuss ?
  • Dugher to shadow transport. Lucy Powell into cabinet with campaigning role.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    edited November 2014

    dr_spyn said:

    ah, how predictable.

    Laurie Penny ‏@PennyRed 21m21 minutes ago
    I'm actually from Lewes. I grew up there and went to Bonfire Night every year. I'm appalled by the Salmond effigy. #LewesBonfire

    She does have a point - the effigy as far too flattering.
    Lewes does have an appalling history of selecting bonfire effigies. IIRC it's not so long that they used the Pope.

    I'm not a Catholic, or even a Christian, but .....
    I think they burn the pope (though not the current one) every year. That's kinda the idea...

    http://www.lewesbonfirecelebrations.com/

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/lewesscenes/sets/72157627354689417/

  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,067
    I can the see the right wing loons and fruitcakes are on form tonight lol..
  • AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    edited November 2014
    Looking at the SLAB contenders' websites, I noticed the "promoted by" at the bottom

    Murphy: James Kelly MSP
    Findlay: Alex Rowley MSP
    Boyack: Edinburgh Council Leader Andrew Burns
    Clark: Michael Connarty MP
    Dugdale: ? I can't find it

    I suppose they are the campaign managers/agents (we knew Kelly is co-running Murphy's campaign along with Jenny Marra MSP)

  • dr_spyn said:

    ah, how predictable.

    Laurie Penny ‏@PennyRed 21m21 minutes ago
    I'm actually from Lewes. I grew up there and went to Bonfire Night every year. I'm appalled by the Salmond effigy. #LewesBonfire

    She does have a point - the effigy as far too flattering.
    Lewes does have an appalling history of selecting bonfire effigies. IIRC it's not so long that they used the Pope.

    I'm not a Catholic, or even a Christian, but .....
    I believe Lewes is staunchly Protestant and every year there is a procession of burning crosses. So an effigy of the Pope being burnt is not in the least bit surprising quite honestly - Over the years, many establishment figures at home and abroad have gone up in flames; tis very democratic as everyone is fair game – long may it continue.

    http://www.lewesbonfirecelebrations.com/wp-content/themes/bonfire/images/seventeen-martyrs-burning-crosses-lewes-bonfire-night-firework-guy-fawkes.jpg
  • and I think Mary Creagh from Transport to International Development to replace Murphy

    Dugher to shadow transport. Lucy Powell into cabinet with campaigning role.

  • HughHugh Posts: 955
    edited November 2014

    Mr. (or Miss?) S, whether it's occurring and, if it is, whether that's due to the natural change in the climate which has always happened or largely/wholly due to human industrial activity.

    The entirely uncontentious (apart from amongst conspiracy theorists / deniers / call them what you want) answers to those questions are yes it is, and the latter.

    You could say the 9/11 terrorist theory is contentious using the same logic (ie. someone somewhere contests it)
  • FalseFlagFalseFlag Posts: 1,801
    The actual official reports on 9 11 are explosive enough.

    http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2014/08/28/did-certain-foreign-governments-facilitate-the-911-attacks/

    It's a shame a lot nonsense is peddled around this and how many believe.
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,067

    Mr. (or Miss?) S, whether it's occurring and, if it is, whether that's due to the natural change in the climate which has always happened or largely/wholly due to human industrial activity.

    Mankind cannot take that kind of risk - the facts are pretty compelling. We need to act now on climate change.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,564

    chestnut said:

    It's certainly starting to appear that we are looking at a battle between Tory and Labour for most seats, with the winner on 280-290 max, and below 35% of the vote.

    Then it will be about deals and alliances.

    If the polls carry on this way, it's inevitable that the five main leaders - Cameron, Ed, Clegg, Sturgeon, Farage - will have to spell out, in advance, their respective positions in terms of alliances and red lines.


    it would be good if they did but I doubt they will. The Libdems (in the form of Lynne Featherstone) have already indicated they are not inclined to give away their negotiating position in advance.....
    Generally parties don't like to be pinned down without knowing the figures. But it's probably true of the LibDems in particular that it'll be hard to go through an election without giving a clear signal. It's easier for Tories and Labour - "We hope to govern, compromising with others if necessary".

    By the way, whether we agree with it or not, that's a particularly entertainingly-written lead piece by David.

  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    Hugh said:

    Mr. (or Miss?) S, whether it's occurring and, if it is, whether that's due to the natural change in the climate which has always happened or largely/wholly due to human industrial activity.

    The entirely uncontentious (apart from amongst conspiracy theorists / deniers / call them what you want) answers to those questions are yes it is, and the latter.
    Would you classify yourself as a crossover denier?

    Tick tock.

  • HughHugh Posts: 955
    Great thread!

    I have a conspiracy theory involving a Prime Minister and a high profile media figure. Anyone wanna hear it?
  • Mr. S, jein.

    For a start, it's not a one-way bet, as the climate has always changed and many proposals have an economic cost. Plus, that's the Simpsons' 'tiger protection rock' line of argument.

    However, there's also a wide range of overlap between both positions (geothermal energy and better energy efficiency, as well as photovoltaic windows, are all good stuff either way).
  • Mr. (or Miss?) S, whether it's occurring and, if it is, whether that's due to the natural change in the climate which has always happened or largely/wholly due to human industrial activity.

    What changes have caused past natural changes in the climate and which is responsible now?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,953
    edited November 2014
    Mr. Me, are you really claiming the climate has been static for the last 3.7bn years or so?

    Even during recorded (pre-industrial) history it's changed dramatically. The idea it can only change due to man's activities is provably false.

    Edited extra bit: sorry, misread the start of your post.

    Everything pre-industrial would be accepted by everyone as climate change caused by natural events. After industrial activities began is more contentious.

    Given the IPCC got their forecasts wrong then upgraded their own confidence in their predictions, and given prominent global warming scientists predicted snow would become a rarity a few years before two arctic winters I'm not willing to just nod and agree with someone because they have a lab coat.
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737

    dr_spyn said:

    ah, how predictable.

    Laurie Penny ‏@PennyRed 21m21 minutes ago
    I'm actually from Lewes. I grew up there and went to Bonfire Night every year. I'm appalled by the Salmond effigy. #LewesBonfire

    She does have a point - the effigy as far too flattering.
    Lewes does have an appalling history of selecting bonfire effigies. IIRC it's not so long that they used the Pope.

    I'm not a Catholic, or even a Christian, but .....
    They still burn "the Pope", except it's not meant to be a representation of the current pope, but of Paul V, pope at the time of the Gunpowder Plot, 400 years ago.

    They have also burned effigies of George Bush, Bin Laden, Gaddafi, etc.

    So Catholics get off relatively lightly, and should not really take offence...
  • HughHugh Posts: 955

    Mr. Me, are you really claiming the climate has been static for the last 3.7bn years or so?

    Even during recorded (pre-industrial) history it's changed dramatically. The idea it can only change due to man's activities is provably false.

    Who claims that?!

    I don't think you really understand much about this do you.
  • ItajaiItajai Posts: 721
    murali_s said:

    I can the see the right wing loons and fruitcakes are on form tonight lol..

    911 "Truthers" are normally on the far left fringe
  • ItajaiItajai Posts: 721

    dr_spyn said:

    ah, how predictable.

    Laurie Penny ‏@PennyRed 21m21 minutes ago
    I'm actually from Lewes. I grew up there and went to Bonfire Night every year. I'm appalled by the Salmond effigy. #LewesBonfire

    She does have a point - the effigy as far too flattering.
    Lewes does have an appalling history of selecting bonfire effigies. IIRC it's not so long that they used the Pope.

    I'm not a Catholic, or even a Christian, but .....
    I believe Lewes is staunchly Protestant and every year there is a procession of burning crosses. So an effigy of the Pope being burnt is not in the least bit surprising quite honestly - Over the years, many establishment figures at home and abroad have gone up in flames; tis very democratic as everyone is fair game – long may it continue.

    http://www.lewesbonfirecelebrations.com/wp-content/themes/bonfire/images/seventeen-martyrs-burning-crosses-lewes-bonfire-night-firework-guy-fawkes.jpg

    Do you really think they would have been allowed to burn a non white? An immigrant perhaps. Even Mandela?

    NuLabour's storm troopers have aleady been in action in the area.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1446744/How-tradition-lit-the-fuse-for-gipsy-effigy.html
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,704
    Interesting article. If elections are broadly a competition between "change" and "more of the same", it would seem that "change" is in the lead.

    So if, and it's a big if, Labour get their act together they could do well.
  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    Hugh said:

    Mr. Me, are you really claiming the climate has been static for the last 3.7bn years or so?

    Even during recorded (pre-industrial) history it's changed dramatically. The idea it can only change due to man's activities is provably false.

    Who claims that?!

    I don't think you really understand much about this do you.
    It was implicit in the question he was answering.

    Tell us again where the NHS stands in worldwide infant mortality stats, so that we can assess the rigour of your scientific methods.

  • Mr. Jonathan, it's a weird election in that way (amongst others).

    Change in Scotland may well mean voting SNP. In England, it might mean UKIP.
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,067
    Itajai said:

    murali_s said:

    I can the see the right wing loons and fruitcakes are on form tonight lol..

    911 "Truthers" are normally on the far left fringe
    I stand corrected - loons and fruitcakes from different ends of the political spectrum.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @IanDunt: "@SamCoatesTimes: At last night's NEC, Labour's ruling body "discussed the meaning of ordinary""<quiet bat people
  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    Itajai said:

    dr_spyn said:

    ah, how predictable.

    Laurie Penny ‏@PennyRed 21m21 minutes ago
    I'm actually from Lewes. I grew up there and went to Bonfire Night every year. I'm appalled by the Salmond effigy. #LewesBonfire

    She does have a point - the effigy as far too flattering.
    Lewes does have an appalling history of selecting bonfire effigies. IIRC it's not so long that they used the Pope.

    I'm not a Catholic, or even a Christian, but .....
    I believe Lewes is staunchly Protestant and every year there is a procession of burning crosses. So an effigy of the Pope being burnt is not in the least bit surprising quite honestly - Over the years, many establishment figures at home and abroad have gone up in flames; tis very democratic as everyone is fair game – long may it continue.

    http://www.lewesbonfirecelebrations.com/wp-content/themes/bonfire/images/seventeen-martyrs-burning-crosses-lewes-bonfire-night-firework-guy-fawkes.jpg

    Do you really think they would have been allowed to burn a non white? An immigrant perhaps. Even Mandela?

    NuLabour's storm troopers have aleady been in action in the area.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1446744/How-tradition-lit-the-fuse-for-gipsy-effigy.html
    Mandela was very, very relaxed about poor blacks being burnt alive by "necklacing" if they happened to be his political opponents, so burning the pious old fraud in effigy would be fairly reasonable.

  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @BBCAllegra: Excl i/v with @LucyMPowell on #Newsnight later this evening on her plans for Labour's general election battle. More front bench, more Ed...

    Yay, the more Ed the better...!
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514

    Mr. (or Miss?) S, whether it's occurring and, if it is, whether that's due to the natural change in the climate which has always happened or largely/wholly due to human industrial activity.

    What changes have caused past natural changes in the climate and which is responsible now?
    ooh there are lots

    mini ice ages, volcanoes, supervolcanoes, changes in the earth's rotation, milankovitch cycles...
  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    edited November 2014

    Mr. Me, are you really claiming the climate has been static for the last 3.7bn years or so?

    Even during recorded (pre-industrial) history it's changed dramatically. The idea it can only change due to man's activities is provably false.

    Edited extra bit: sorry, misread the start of your post.

    Everything pre-industrial would be accepted by everyone as climate change caused by natural events. After industrial activities began is more contentious.

    Given the IPCC got their forecasts wrong then upgraded their own confidence in their predictions, and given prominent global warming scientists predicted snow would become a rarity a few years before two arctic winters I'm not willing to just nod and agree with someone because they have a lab coat.

    “The Romans wrote about growing wine grapes in Britain in the first century and then it got too cold during the Dark Ages. Ancient tax records show the Britons grew their own wine grapes in the 11th century, during the Medieval Warming, and then it got too cold during the Little Ice Age."

    There'll always be cranks with bees in their bonnets, I think we can laugh.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,704
    Hugh said:



    I have a conspiracy theory involving a Prime Minister and a high profile media figure. Anyone wanna hear it?

    Oscar Wilde and Rosebury?
  • Everything pre-industrial would be accepted by everyone as climate change caused by natural events. After industrial activities began is more contentious.

    Very few climate scientists have lab coats. There are some hypotheses that put human influence on the climate further back than the industrial age - I think it is Ruddiman who claims you can see the effect of the Black Death on the temperature record, for example.

    The question I am asking you is what changes caused past climate changes - after all they didn't happen by magic or fossil fuel burning by industrialised civilisations - but something must have changed to cause a change in the climate.

    The second question I am asking is which of these past changes is changing now to create the current change in the climate? Because if the burning of fossil fuels is not changing the climate then there must be something else that is doing so instead.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    Ishmael_X said:

    Itajai said:

    dr_spyn said:

    ah, how predictable.

    Laurie Penny ‏@PennyRed 21m21 minutes ago
    I'm actually from Lewes. I grew up there and went to Bonfire Night every year. I'm appalled by the Salmond effigy. #LewesBonfire

    She does have a point - the effigy as far too flattering.
    Lewes does have an appalling history of selecting bonfire effigies. IIRC it's not so long that they used the Pope.

    I'm not a Catholic, or even a Christian, but .....
    I believe Lewes is staunchly Protestant and every year there is a procession of burning crosses. So an effigy of the Pope being burnt is not in the least bit surprising quite honestly - Over the years, many establishment figures at home and abroad have gone up in flames; tis very democratic as everyone is fair game – long may it continue.

    http://www.lewesbonfirecelebrations.com/wp-content/themes/bonfire/images/seventeen-martyrs-burning-crosses-lewes-bonfire-night-firework-guy-fawkes.jpg

    Do you really think they would have been allowed to burn a non white? An immigrant perhaps. Even Mandela?

    NuLabour's storm troopers have aleady been in action in the area.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1446744/How-tradition-lit-the-fuse-for-gipsy-effigy.html
    Mandela was very, very relaxed about poor blacks being burnt alive by "necklacing" if they happened to be his political opponents, so burning the pious old fraud in effigy would be fairly reasonable.

    Was he relaxed? I think he was still in clink when his missus and her footer team were necklacing their opponents. Mind you, in 1988 the Church of England refused to condemn the practice and said that violence could be used for political ends of people didn't have a vote.
  • Scott_P said:

    @BBCAllegra: Excl i/v with @LucyMPowell on #Newsnight later this evening on her plans for Labour's general election battle. More front bench, more Ed...

    Yay, the more Ed the better...!

    Extremely exclusive: just seen her being interviewed on BBC 24 news channel.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @michaelsavage: God, is there really a dreadful "let Miliband be Miliband" thing going on? Certainly still needs to prove why he was compelled to beat David
  • antifrank said:

    dr_spyn said:

    ah, how predictable.

    Laurie Penny ‏@PennyRed 21m21 minutes ago
    I'm actually from Lewes. I grew up there and went to Bonfire Night every year. I'm appalled by the Salmond effigy. #LewesBonfire

    She does have a point - the effigy as far too flattering.
    Lewes does have an appalling history of selecting bonfire effigies. IIRC it's not so long that they used the Pope.

    I'm not a Catholic, or even a Christian, but .....
    In fairness, that does at least have some residual connection with Guy Fawkes Night, which was promoted as state-sponsored anti-Catholicism in order to get the English public to warm to their new Scottish king.
    so how come when the good folks at Lewes try to warm the current scottish king there's such a fuss ?
    He's in good company, they burn effigies of public figures every year. He should be honoured to be chosen.

    The good folk of Firle (just down the road) caused a bit of a stir a few years ago when they burned a gypsy caravan with the registration plate P1KEY.

    I wonder if Plato is out burning tim in effigy tonight, or what HurstLlama is up to?

  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    Jonathan said:

    Hugh said:



    I have a conspiracy theory involving a Prime Minister and a high profile media figure. Anyone wanna hear it?

    Oscar Wilde and Rosebury?
    Tony Blair & Wendy Murdoch?
  • ItajaiItajai Posts: 721
    Ishmael_X said:

    Itajai said:

    dr_spyn said:

    ah, how predictable.

    Laurie Penny ‏@PennyRed 21m21 minutes ago
    I'm actually from Lewes. I grew up there and went to Bonfire Night every year. I'm appalled by the Salmond effigy. #LewesBonfire

    She does have a point - the effigy as far too flattering.
    Lewes does have an appalling history of selecting bonfire effigies. IIRC it's not so long that they used the Pope.

    I'm not a Catholic, or even a Christian, but .....
    I believe Lewes is staunchly Protestant and every year there is a procession of burning crosses. So an effigy of the Pope being burnt is not in the least bit surprising quite honestly - Over the years, many establishment figures at home and abroad have gone up in flames; tis very democratic as everyone is fair game – long may it continue.

    http://www.lewesbonfirecelebrations.com/wp-content/themes/bonfire/images/seventeen-martyrs-burning-crosses-lewes-bonfire-night-firework-guy-fawkes.jpg

    Do you really think they would have been allowed to burn a non white? An immigrant perhaps. Even Mandela?

    NuLabour's storm troopers have aleady been in action in the area.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1446744/How-tradition-lit-the-fuse-for-gipsy-effigy.html
    Mandela was very, very relaxed about poor blacks being burnt alive by "necklacing" if they happened to be his political opponents, so burning the pious old fraud in effigy would be fairly reasonable.


    Careful!!!

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2520662/Neil-Phillips-quizzed-8-HOURS-police-Nelson-Mandela-Twitter-jokes.html
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Hugh said:

    Mr. Antifrank, I think it's ridiculous to put the Holocaust alongside the contentious issue of global warming, and the contentious issue of the politics relating to the Ukraine/Russia situation.

    It's a small step away from the uncouth 'denier' language.

    Lol.

    Conspiracy theories are nuts, unless it's my conspiracy theory.

    Climate science denial, Holocaust denial, 9/11 denial, all the same.

    Politically / ideologically motivated delusion.
    Out of interest, what odds are you willing to bet that next year's global air temperatures will be higher than, say, 2003?
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    edited November 2014
    Itajai said:

    dr_spyn said:

    ah, how predictable.

    Laurie Penny ‏@PennyRed 21m21 minutes ago
    I'm actually from Lewes. I grew up there and went to Bonfire Night every year. I'm appalled by the Salmond effigy. #LewesBonfire

    She does have a point - the effigy as far too flattering.
    Lewes does have an appalling history of selecting bonfire effigies. IIRC it's not so long that they used the Pope.

    I'm not a Catholic, or even a Christian, but .....
    I believe Lewes is staunchly Protestant and every year there is a procession of burning crosses. So an effigy of the Pope being burnt is not in the least bit surprising quite honestly - Over the years, many establishment figures at home and abroad have gone up in flames; tis very democratic as everyone is fair game – long may it continue.

    http://www.lewesbonfirecelebrations.com/wp-content/themes/bonfire/images/seventeen-martyrs-burning-crosses-lewes-bonfire-night-firework-guy-fawkes.jpg

    Do you really think they would have been allowed to burn a non white? An immigrant perhaps. Even Mandela?
    Not sure what your point is? - They had no qualms in burning an effigy of Gaddafi ( I think he counts as 'non white') - I believe the characters chosen each bonfire night are usually those that have pissed off the local residence most that year - Salmond fits the bill handsomely; "an immigrant" hasn't to the best of my knowledge.

    http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03095/PX10269357_C900KN_3095315k.jpg
  • Mr. Me, well, quite, but the climate's always changed. In England's recorded history the Thames has, over a small period, repeatedly frozen, and earlier than that it was notably warmer.

    A changing climate isn't some sort of dread crisis, it's the natural state of affairs.


  • MD

    Replying to your comment from this morning.

    Sayeeda Warsi does come from Dewsbury, her connections to Rotherham come via this individual:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazir_Ahmed,_Baron_Ahmed
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    edited November 2014

    FPT:

    Socrates said:

    "He's welcome to tell me how aviation fuel or burning debris is capable of bringing down a steel framed skyscraper -I look forward to it."

    Because steel becomes very weak at temperatures much above 1000 degrees Fahrenheit, and certainly too weak to hold up a massive skyscraper.

    I was unsuccessful in getting you to watch a video last time but I'll try again with this trailer, which answers your point.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrjcXOJIWw0

    Bottom line, all the explanations of how the planes brought down the towers (including the third one they didn't even hit), are taking an existing scenario, and explaining how that could have happened. NOT assessing what is most likely to have happened.
    Which claim in that video are you saying counters mine? If it's the bit about not melting steel, that's true. You don't need to melt steel, you just need to weaken it to the point the building will collapse.

    I also note that the video has a go at the cover-up investigation for not examining for explosive residue (they admit to it). Given they went to such lengths to set up explosives in the tower, and arranged for the investigating team to hide this fact, why didn't the team just lie and say they tested for explosive residue and it was negative? Sounds like a pretty bad cover-up to me.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341

    Labour reshuffle.

    And the band played on

    image
  • Socrates said:

    Hugh said:

    Mr. Antifrank, I think it's ridiculous to put the Holocaust alongside the contentious issue of global warming, and the contentious issue of the politics relating to the Ukraine/Russia situation.

    It's a small step away from the uncouth 'denier' language.

    Lol.

    Conspiracy theories are nuts, unless it's my conspiracy theory.

    Climate science denial, Holocaust denial, 9/11 denial, all the same.

    Politically / ideologically motivated delusion.
    Out of interest, what odds are you willing to bet that next year's global air temperatures will be higher than, say, 2003?
    Which temperature data set? Calendar year or Meteorological year?
  • Mr. Richard, fair enough.

    Ahmed's an utter arse. Still recall the disgusting lack of opprobrium heaped upon him when he threatened to summon 10,000 angry Muslims if Geert Wilders showed up.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514

    Mr. Me, well, quite, but the climate's always changed. In England's recorded history the Thames has, over a small period, repeatedly frozen, and earlier than that it was notably warmer.

    A changing climate isn't some sort of dread crisis, it's the natural state of affairs.

    Fear not Mr Dancer, in about 25,000 years Scotland will be back under a kilometre of ice and malc's relations will be living in Kent.
  • Mr. (or Miss?) S, whether it's occurring and, if it is, whether that's due to the natural change in the climate which has always happened or largely/wholly due to human industrial activity.

    What changes have caused past natural changes in the climate and which is responsible now?
    ooh there are lots

    mini ice ages, volcanoes, supervolcanoes, changes in the earth's rotation, milankovitch cycles...
    That's the answer to the first question. The second question is which of these has happened recently to cause the recent climate change?
  • Mr. Me, well, quite, but the climate's always changed. In England's recorded history the Thames has, over a small period, repeatedly frozen, and earlier than that it was notably warmer.

    A changing climate isn't some sort of dread crisis, it's the natural state of affairs.

    You won't answer my questions about the points that you defined as being contentious. Instead you are trying to change your argument. Why is that?
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    edited November 2014

    Socrates said:

    Hugh said:

    Mr. Antifrank, I think it's ridiculous to put the Holocaust alongside the contentious issue of global warming, and the contentious issue of the politics relating to the Ukraine/Russia situation.

    It's a small step away from the uncouth 'denier' language.

    Lol.

    Conspiracy theories are nuts, unless it's my conspiracy theory.

    Climate science denial, Holocaust denial, 9/11 denial, all the same.

    Politically / ideologically motivated delusion.
    Out of interest, what odds are you willing to bet that next year's global air temperatures will be higher than, say, 2003?
    Which temperature data set? Calendar year or Meteorological year?
    NASA's Land-Ocean temperature index. On reflection, let's pick 2005 so it's a ten year period.
  • Oil refineries, power stations, who needs them when we have the magic money tree and the magic energy fairy.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/11209454/The-UK-is-losing-one-of-its-seven-oil-refineries-Milford-Haven.html
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited November 2014
    On unrelated news, Catalonia is holding it's secession vote on Sunday, the Spanish government is preparing to squash it by force of arms:

    http://www.latimes.com/world/europe/la-fg-catalonia-spain-secession-vote-20141104-story.html

    I suggested in the past that the only way that Catalonia can safeguard itself is by forming militias because the spanish will use military force to prevent a peaceful secession, it seems that I was right.
    Barcelona could turn into a military battleground.
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    Have any of PB's Deedahs been to the cop shop on Letsby Avenue?
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    H

    Mr. (or Miss?) S, whether it's occurring and, if it is, whether that's due to the natural change in the climate which has always happened or largely/wholly due to human industrial activity.

    What changes have caused past natural changes in the climate and which is responsible now?
    ooh there are lots

    mini ice ages, volcanoes, supervolcanoes, changes in the earth's rotation, milankovitch cycles...
    That's the answer to the first question. The second question is which of these has happened recently to cause the recent climate change?
    Hot air from lefties.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514

    Mr. (or Miss?) S, whether it's occurring and, if it is, whether that's due to the natural change in the climate which has always happened or largely/wholly due to human industrial activity.

    What changes have caused past natural changes in the climate and which is responsible now?
    ooh there are lots

    mini ice ages, volcanoes, supervolcanoes, changes in the earth's rotation, milankovitch cycles...
    That's the answer to the first question. The second question is which of these has happened recently to cause the recent climate change?
    LOL given the so called climate scientists haven't a clue why do you think a paddy running factories in Birmingham should know ?

    Fag packet guess says we haven't got enough understanding of natural cycles to be able to forecast what's going on. It's all human arrogance, frankly the Yellowstone caldera could blow tomorrow or we could get whacked by a large meteor and all the AGW hoohaa would shrink into the rounding. the idea that we can control cosmic forces is just self-delusion.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Socrates said:

    Hugh said:

    Mr. Antifrank, I think it's ridiculous to put the Holocaust alongside the contentious issue of global warming, and the contentious issue of the politics relating to the Ukraine/Russia situation.

    It's a small step away from the uncouth 'denier' language.

    Lol.

    Conspiracy theories are nuts, unless it's my conspiracy theory.

    Climate science denial, Holocaust denial, 9/11 denial, all the same.

    Politically / ideologically motivated delusion.
    Out of interest, what odds are you willing to bet that next year's global air temperatures will be higher than, say, 2003?
    Individual year bets are a mugs game when it comes to climate.

    10 Year running average I'd be happy to go with.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,564
    Ishmael_X said:

    Itajai said:

    dr_spyn said:

    ah, how predictable.

    Laurie Penny ‏@PennyRed 21m21 minutes ago
    I'm actually from Lewes. I grew up there and went to Bonfire Night every year. I'm appalled by the Salmond effigy. #LewesBonfire

    She does have a point - the effigy as far too flattering.
    Lewes does have an appalling history of selecting bonfire effigies. IIRC it's not so long that they used the Pope.

    I'm not a Catholic, or even a Christian, but .....
    I believe Lewes is staunchly Protestant and every year there is a procession of burning crosses. So an effigy of the Pope being burnt is not in the least bit surprising quite honestly - Over the years, many establishment figures at home and abroad have gone up in flames; tis very democratic as everyone is fair game – long may it continue.

    http://www.lewesbonfirecelebrations.com/wp-content/themes/bonfire/images/seventeen-martyrs-burning-crosses-lewes-bonfire-night-firework-guy-fawkes.jpg

    Do you really think they would have been allowed to burn a non white? An immigrant perhaps. Even Mandela?

    NuLabour's storm troopers have aleady been in action in the area.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1446744/How-tradition-lit-the-fuse-for-gipsy-effigy.html
    Mandela was very, very relaxed about poor blacks being burnt alive by "necklacing" if they happened to be his political opponents, so burning the pious old fraud in effigy would be fairly reasonable.

    Nope, as Hurst Llama points out.

    The whole Lewes effigy thing is unpleasant nonsense, whoever the target is - one of those offensive gestures which tries to get away with being "only a bit of fun". But it's best ignored, as you would a kid shouting a rude word.
  • Mr. (or Miss?) S, whether it's occurring and, if it is, whether that's due to the natural change in the climate which has always happened or largely/wholly due to human industrial activity.

    What changes have caused past natural changes in the climate and which is responsible now?
    ooh there are lots

    mini ice ages, volcanoes, supervolcanoes, changes in the earth's rotation, milankovitch cycles...
    That's the answer to the first question. The second question is which of these has happened recently to cause the recent climate change?
    LOL given the so called climate scientists haven't a clue why do you think a paddy running factories in Birmingham should know ?

    Fag packet guess says we haven't got enough understanding of natural cycles to be able to forecast what's going on. It's all human arrogance, frankly the Yellowstone caldera could blow tomorrow or we could get whacked by a large meteor and all the AGW hoohaa would shrink into the rounding. the idea that we can control cosmic forces is just self-delusion.

    No more boom and bust and snow.
    http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-724017.html
  • Ishmael_X said:

    Itajai said:

    dr_spyn said:

    ah, how predictable.

    Laurie Penny ‏@PennyRed 21m21 minutes ago
    I'm actually from Lewes. I grew up there and went to Bonfire Night every year. I'm appalled by the Salmond effigy. #LewesBonfire

    She does have a point - the effigy as far too flattering.
    Lewes does have an appalling history of selecting bonfire effigies. IIRC it's not so long that they used the Pope.

    I'm not a Catholic, or even a Christian, but .....
    I believe Lewes is staunchly Protestant and every year there is a procession of burning crosses. So an effigy of the Pope being burnt is not in the least bit surprising quite honestly - Over the years, many establishment figures at home and abroad have gone up in flames; tis very democratic as everyone is fair game – long may it continue.

    http://www.lewesbonfirecelebrations.com/wp-content/themes/bonfire/images/seventeen-martyrs-burning-crosses-lewes-bonfire-night-firework-guy-fawkes.jpg

    Do you really think they would have been allowed to burn a non white? An immigrant perhaps. Even Mandela?

    NuLabour's storm troopers have aleady been in action in the area.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1446744/How-tradition-lit-the-fuse-for-gipsy-effigy.html
    Mandela was very, very relaxed about poor blacks being burnt alive by "necklacing" if they happened to be his political opponents, so burning the pious old fraud in effigy would be fairly reasonable.

    Nope, as Hurst Llama points out.

    The whole Lewes effigy thing is unpleasant nonsense, whoever the target is - one of those offensive gestures which tries to get away with being "only a bit of fun". But it's best ignored, as you would a kid shouting a rude word.
    I sure Salmond is greatly flattered. Stop being such a stick in the mud.

  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,067
    edited November 2014

    Mr. (or Miss?) S, whether it's occurring and, if it is, whether that's due to the natural change in the climate which has always happened or largely/wholly due to human industrial activity.

    What changes have caused past natural changes in the climate and which is responsible now?
    ooh there are lots

    mini ice ages, volcanoes, supervolcanoes, changes in the earth's rotation, milankovitch cycles...
    That's the answer to the first question. The second question is which of these has happened recently to cause the recent climate change?
    LOL given the so called climate scientists haven't a clue why do you think a paddy running factories in Birmingham should know ?

    Fag packet guess says we haven't got enough understanding of natural cycles to be able to forecast what's going on. It's all human arrogance, frankly the Yellowstone caldera could blow tomorrow or we could get whacked by a large meteor and all the AGW hoohaa would shrink into the rounding. the idea that we can control cosmic forces is just self-delusion.
    Quite frankly a ridiculous post.

    It's akin to saying that why should I care about managing my diabetes because there is a chance a number 24 bus will slam straight into me tomorrow...
  • Jonathan said:

    Hugh said:



    I have a conspiracy theory involving a Prime Minister and a high profile media figure. Anyone wanna hear it?

    Oscar Wilde and Rosebury?
    Gordon Brown and Owen Jones?
  • Mr. Speedy, could've sworn they (the Catalans) had cancelled the referendum to hold elections instead. Hmm. Anyway, it may prove an interesting contrast with how the Scottish question went. Let's hope it doesn't get bloody (though I fear it may).

    Mr. Me, I'm not changing my argument. If you feel I haven't addressed a point you've raised, do point me to it/repeat it and I'll let you know my view.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,624

    Oil refineries, power stations, who needs them when we have the magic money tree and the magic energy fairy.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/11209454/The-UK-is-losing-one-of-its-seven-oil-refineries-Milford-Haven.html

    Oil refineries, power stations, who needs them when we have the magic money tree and the magic energy fairy.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/11209454/The-UK-is-losing-one-of-its-seven-oil-refineries-Milford-Haven.html

    World oil refining capacity is growing far faster than world oil production, so it's no great surprise that old refineries, that struggle with heavier blends of oil, are shutting down.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    edited November 2014
    Alistair said:

    Socrates said:

    Hugh said:

    Mr. Antifrank, I think it's ridiculous to put the Holocaust alongside the contentious issue of global warming, and the contentious issue of the politics relating to the Ukraine/Russia situation.

    It's a small step away from the uncouth 'denier' language.

    Lol.

    Conspiracy theories are nuts, unless it's my conspiracy theory.

    Climate science denial, Holocaust denial, 9/11 denial, all the same.

    Politically / ideologically motivated delusion.
    Out of interest, what odds are you willing to bet that next year's global air temperatures will be higher than, say, 2003?
    Individual year bets are a mugs game when it comes to climate.

    10 Year running average I'd be happy to go with.
    That's like saying it's a mug's game to bet on individual football matches or elections. It's not a mug's game: you bet on the odds. What do you think the chance is that next year will have a higher temperature than a decade ago? Let's bear in mind that the average growth over the last century has been 0.01 degrees celsius each year, surely the underlying trend will suggest it's highly likely that next year's is higher than a decade ago. 0.1 degrees higher, I'd have thought.

    Strangely I'm not going to wait to 2020 to collect my winnings.
  • Socrates said:

    Socrates said:

    Hugh said:

    Mr. Antifrank, I think it's ridiculous to put the Holocaust alongside the contentious issue of global warming, and the contentious issue of the politics relating to the Ukraine/Russia situation.

    It's a small step away from the uncouth 'denier' language.

    Lol.

    Conspiracy theories are nuts, unless it's my conspiracy theory.

    Climate science denial, Holocaust denial, 9/11 denial, all the same.

    Politically / ideologically motivated delusion.
    Out of interest, what odds are you willing to bet that next year's global air temperatures will be higher than, say, 2003?
    Which temperature data set? Calendar year or Meteorological year?
    NASA's Land-Ocean temperature index. On reflection, let's pick 2005 so it's a ten year period.
    2005 was warmer than 2003.

    The probability of 2015 being warmer than 2005 is about 1-in-5 in my view, so the appropriate odds would be - I think - 4/1 warmer and 1/4 colder, perhaps adjusted slightly to produce an overround, so 7/2 warmer and 1/5 colder?
  • Mr. (or Miss?) S, whether it's occurring and, if it is, whether that's due to the natural change in the climate which has always happened or largely/wholly due to human industrial activity.

    What changes have caused past natural changes in the climate and which is responsible now?
    ooh there are lots

    mini ice ages, volcanoes, supervolcanoes, changes in the earth's rotation, milankovitch cycles...
    That's the answer to the first question. The second question is which of these has happened recently to cause the recent climate change?
    Try a peak in the activity of the sun which reached its maximum in the early part of the millennium and has since declined.

    Nothing about the warming period which ended in the early part of this millennium is unusual when compared with previous warming periods - maximum temperatures, rate of change or extent are all comparable with previous warming periods. In fact they all compare on the low side with previous major warming periods such as in the Mid 2nd millenium BC or the Roman period.

    The highest temperatures seen in the post glacial period were around 6-8000 BP in a period known as the Holocene Climactic Optimum. We have not come close to approaching the temperatures of that period at the moment. Not surprisingly it coincided with the foundations of our agriculture and the birth of civilisations.

    With a few blips like those I have mentioned it has all been pretty much downhill since then.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    @Richard_Tyndall

    What's your source for solar activity levels?
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,067
    Meanwhile, in the real world (not to be confused with the alternate universe inhabited by PB Tory loons), 2014 is on course to be warmest year ever recorded.

    http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2014/9
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    edited November 2014

    Socrates said:

    Socrates said:

    Hugh said:

    Mr. Antifrank, I think it's ridiculous to put the Holocaust alongside the contentious issue of global warming, and the contentious issue of the politics relating to the Ukraine/Russia situation.

    It's a small step away from the uncouth 'denier' language.

    Lol.

    Conspiracy theories are nuts, unless it's my conspiracy theory.

    Climate science denial, Holocaust denial, 9/11 denial, all the same.

    Politically / ideologically motivated delusion.
    Out of interest, what odds are you willing to bet that next year's global air temperatures will be higher than, say, 2003?
    Which temperature data set? Calendar year or Meteorological year?
    NASA's Land-Ocean temperature index. On reflection, let's pick 2005 so it's a ten year period.
    2005 was warmer than 2003.

    The probability of 2015 being warmer than 2005 is about 1-in-5 in my view, so the appropriate odds would be - I think - 4/1 warmer and 1/4 colder, perhaps adjusted slightly to produce an overround, so 7/2 warmer and 1/5 colder?
    So you think it's highly unlikely the Earth will have warmed in the underlying trend over the last decade?
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    murali_s said:

    Mr. (or Miss?) S, whether it's occurring and, if it is, whether that's due to the natural change in the climate which has always happened or largely/wholly due to human industrial activity.

    What changes have caused past natural changes in the climate and which is responsible now?
    ooh there are lots

    mini ice ages, volcanoes, supervolcanoes, changes in the earth's rotation, milankovitch cycles...
    That's the answer to the first question. The second question is which of these has happened recently to cause the recent climate change?
    LOL given the so called climate scientists haven't a clue why do you think a paddy running factories in Birmingham should know ?

    Fag packet guess says we haven't got enough understanding of natural cycles to be able to forecast what's going on. It's all human arrogance, frankly the Yellowstone caldera could blow tomorrow or we could get whacked by a large meteor and all the AGW hoohaa would shrink into the rounding. the idea that we can control cosmic forces is just self-delusion.
    Quite frankly a ridiculous post.

    It's akin to saying that Why should I care about managing diabetes because there is a chance a number 24 bus will slam straight into me tomorrow...
    yeah that's roughly where we are since you don't know if you've got diabetes, a weak bladdder, bulimia or mental delusions.

  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    Lewes bonfire no 1 on Twitter.

    Cameron, Clegg, Major, Lawson, Brown, Blair, Thatcher, Bush, Gorbachev have been sent up in the flames, where was the outrage? Laurie Penny might be remembered this time next year, might help shift a couple of books, perhaps Milband will be given the treatment.

    Why is a retired SNP leader so special?
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    murali_s said:

    Meanwhile, in the real world (not to be confused with the alternate universe inhabited by PB Tory loons), 2014 is on course to be warmest year ever recorded.

    http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2014/9

    What odds will you bet me that 2015 will have a higher temperature than 2005?
  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664

    Ishmael_X said:

    Itajai said:

    dr_spyn said:

    ah, how predictable.

    Laurie Penny ‏@PennyRed 21m21 minutes ago
    I'm actually from Lewes. I grew up there and went to Bonfire Night every year. I'm appalled by the Salmond effigy. #LewesBonfire

    She does have a point - the effigy as far too flattering.
    Lewes does have an appalling history of selecting bonfire effigies. IIRC it's not so long that they used the Pope.

    I'm not a Catholic, or even a Christian, but .....
    I believe Lewes is staunchly Protestant and every year there is a procession of burning crosses. So an effigy of the Pope being burnt is not in the least bit surprising quite honestly - Over the years, many establishment figures at home and abroad have gone up in flames; tis very democratic as everyone is fair game – long may it continue.

    http://www.lewesbonfirecelebrations.com/wp-content/themes/bonfire/images/seventeen-martyrs-burning-crosses-lewes-bonfire-night-firework-guy-fawkes.jpg

    Do you really think they would have been allowed to burn a non white? An immigrant perhaps. Even Mandela?

    NuLabour's storm troopers have aleady been in action in the area.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1446744/How-tradition-lit-the-fuse-for-gipsy-effigy.html
    Mandela was very, very relaxed about poor blacks being burnt alive by "necklacing" if they happened to be his political opponents, so burning the pious old fraud in effigy would be fairly reasonable.

    Was he relaxed? I think he was still in clink when his missus and her footer team were necklacing their opponents. Mind you, in 1988 the Church of England refused to condemn the practice and said that violence could be used for political ends of people didn't have a vote.
    Good for the C of E.

    He was in clink, but able to make his views known, and incredibly influential. He said NOTHING about Winnie's keynote necklacing speech in 1986.

    20 minutes it takes the average necklacing victim to die, it says on wikipedia.

  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    Con maj continues to drift 6.8
    Lab in a touch at 4...
  • Socrates said:

    ...What do you think the chance is that next year will have a higher temperature than a decade ago? Let's bear in mind that the average growth over the last century has been 0.01 degrees celsius each year, surely the underlying trend will suggest it's highly likely that next year's is higher than a decade ago. 0.1 degrees higher, I'd have thought....

    Your reasoning is faulty because you have to know two further things to judge good odds. (1) How large the inter-annual variability is. (2) Whether the base year was above or below trend.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    murali_s said:

    Itajai said:

    murali_s said:

    I can the see the right wing loons and fruitcakes are on form tonight lol..

    911 "Truthers" are normally on the far left fringe
    I stand corrected - loons and fruitcakes from different ends of the political spectrum.
    I've foun 911 conspiracy nuts cross political boundaries. I've run into both survivalist "they're coming for my guns" right wingers and left proto-anarchists who all have their own 911 theories.

    They conflicting conspiracy theories results in groups that are at odds with each other and accuse each other of being pawns for the government.
  • Right, chaps, I'm off.
  • Mr. (or Miss?) S, whether it's occurring and, if it is, whether that's due to the natural change in the climate which has always happened or largely/wholly due to human industrial activity.

    What changes have caused past natural changes in the climate and which is responsible now?
    ooh there are lots

    mini ice ages, volcanoes, supervolcanoes, changes in the earth's rotation, milankovitch cycles...
    That's the answer to the first question. The second question is which of these has happened recently to cause the recent climate change?
    Try a peak in the activity of the sun which reached its maximum in the early part of the millennium and has since declined.

    Nothing about the warming period which ended in the early part of this millennium is unusual when compared with previous warming periods - maximum temperatures, rate of change or extent are all comparable with previous warming periods. In fact they all compare on the low side with previous major warming periods such as in the Mid 2nd millenium BC or the Roman period.

    The highest temperatures seen in the post glacial period were around 6-8000 BP in a period known as the Holocene Climactic Optimum. We have not come close to approaching the temperatures of that period at the moment. Not surprisingly it coincided with the foundations of our agriculture and the birth of civilisations.

    With a few blips like those I have mentioned it has all been pretty much downhill since then.
    Solar activity peaked in about 1960... http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/blogs/climateqa/has-the-sun-been-more-active-in-recent-decades-and-could-it-be-responsible-for-some-global-warming/

    Apart from that, good comment.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    Socrates said:

    ...What do you think the chance is that next year will have a higher temperature than a decade ago? Let's bear in mind that the average growth over the last century has been 0.01 degrees celsius each year, surely the underlying trend will suggest it's highly likely that next year's is higher than a decade ago. 0.1 degrees higher, I'd have thought....

    Your reasoning is faulty because you have to know two further things to judge good odds. (1) How large the inter-annual variability is. (2) Whether the base year was above or below trend.
    Ok, let's take the inter-annual variability out. What odds will you offer 2015 is above the 2003-2007 average?
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited November 2014
    Socrates said:


    That's like saying it's a mug's game to bet on individual football matches or elections. It's not a mug's game: you bet on the odds. What do you think the chance is that next year will have a higher temperature than a decade ago? Let's bear in mind that the average growth over the last century has been 0.01 degrees celsius each year, surely the underlying trend will suggest it's highly likely that next year's is higher than a decade ago. 0.1 degrees higher, I'd have thought.

    Strangely I'm not going to wait to 2020 to collect my winnings.

    Individual years of climate vary so much is what makes it a mugs bet.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0vj-0imOLw&feature=youtu.be

    Who knows which way the dog is going to go next year, but the 10 year running average shows the rise.

    That is I'm willing to bet that 2004-2014 is warmer than 1993-2003.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    As there seem to be some knowledgeable people on here tonight, has anyone produced a model of the Earth's climate that matches history? I only ask because if a model can't explain past data I am not sure how much use it is in predicting the future.
  • Socrates said:

    @Richard_Tyndall

    What's your source for solar activity levels?

    Go and look at any graph for the solar cycles and comparison with temperatures. There is a direct correlation between the two going back 400 years into the Maunder minimum. The cycles throughout the second half of the 20th century were particularly high (the highest having been cycle 19 in the 1960s but throughout the 80s and 90s they were very high as well.) Both the Maunder and Dalton minima are correlated with very low solar cycles.
This discussion has been closed.