Porker wrote:..the debate continues (fortunately). I certainly wouldn't want to think that it was all cut and dried to the extent that anyone questioning it is labelled a "denier" or somehow unscientific.
Anyway, another article from the Sunday Times today. I'd like to think that the evidence on which decisions to spend billions and possibly trillions of pounds weren't based on this sort of thing:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6991177.ece
regards
P.
Porker wrote:Given the costs involved and our current economic situation, you would think that if there was a chance, even a slim to middling one, that we could avoid having to cough up a few trillion, it would be seriously considered. But that doesn't seem to be the case. That in its own right is enough to make me wonder whether there is an alternative agenda at work here.
MGF wrote:I am not convinved climate change is man-made either however I cannot deny it is a strong possibility and the consequences of it being so are potentially catastrophic for human life
MGF wrote:However the way in which Climate Change is discussed is similar to Political Correctness. Those with more conservative political inclinations feel like they're being told how to live by the more politically progressive.
Porker wrote:Layer onto that the fact that climate change is now an industry in its own right (albeit one that destroys wealth) and there are plenty of reasons to be extremely cautious of what we're told is "settled".
Porker wrote:...non-human-influenced changes which are undoubtedly occurring.
Return to General Car Chat Forum
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 44 guests