Search results

If you are interested, I believe we're only at the start of beginning to understand our impact on the planet. I remain completely open minded as the science evolves, however overwhelmingly, the picture is that we are contributing to climate change. The consequences of this are much harder to...

Why are you asking me the question? You stated as a fact a man made climate change catastrophe wouldn't happen. It was not my point to disprove this, just simply point out that you criticise people for holding things as facts, then hold one yourself. Metaphorically speaking, who is saying to...

Can you get more contradictory than criticising an absolute belief, by ending with an absolute belief! How on earth can you type all that, then state as a fact, an environmental catastrophe isn't going to happen. You cannot possibly know that with any more certainty than someone who believes...

Someone had to play the brains card! :bowdown::hilton::stupid::wrong::dunce::ohmy::fishing::fishing:

Totally agree. A skeptic only needs to demonstrate a single predictive model is wrong to proclaim the entire theory of manmade climate change is wrong. It is barmy. In our current time, it is the equivalent of saying Galileo was a heretic for saying the earth rotated around the sun.

New technology will always cost more - initially. Solar panels for example have tumbled in price as worldwide demand has increased. As demand has increased the technology continues to improve. More investment can then be made to improve the technology and make further advancements. You have to...

It's always going to be easier to disprove emerging theories, than prove the theories themselves. This has been true of science throughout the ages. Whether the earth was round, we rotated round the sun and not vice versa, the atom, germs etc. etc. etc. You can bet your bottom dollar that the...