Dartmoor_Matt

Isn't that the point with the whole discussion regarding global warming. Nothing is gospel, except the fact that the earth is currently, or has been recently, warming. How this is arrived at is fully open for debate, which I think IS the point of this, and other, threads. Just a thought. As for the research article, should make for an interesting read!

Granted. 3 good reasons, but again I think it comes down to the proof issue. There are very plausible reasons why people might believe or not believe in the other theories you mentioned. Not floating off into space, religion and not understanding. But thats off topic. It could well be natural... we are afteral still coming out of an ice age. (some might say about to enter one but thats a whole different kettle of fish). The only sure way to make people believe is when they stand in central london and get their feet wet. It doesn't help matters when certain BBC weather people say things such as "At least its mild" - They should say "but its far too mild for this time of year" begin to change mindsets at the base level and the rest will eventually follow. Until people are shown that leaving a light on, or turning the heating up has a direct impact on the world at large they aren't likely to be too bothered.

401,000 years ago how many planes, cars and factories were there? Just because they are occuring at the same time, doesn't make them mutually dependant. I believe there is no definitive proof? Which is why im suggesting that people are less than convinced. This is afteral the purpose of this thread, not if there is human assisted GW but why people might not believe there is.

The only reason there are 6.5bn people on the earth is because of the various increases in technology. The by product of that is increased emissions of gases that occur in the most part, naturally. In 20 years time the population will be 9bn. These people need feeding, housing, jobs. The by product... yup. It was always going to happen. That doesn't prove its affecting global warming. All the trends show is that it is warming, not WHY its warming. I thought that was the point?

In a world that has been here for billions of years, you'll excuse me for thinking the last 20 years are fairly insignificant. When someone can prove this hasn't always happened I'll take more notice. Til then I'll take everything under advisement.

The fact is that this HAD to happen in order to sustain the population growth, had we all remained in caves, swinging wooden clubs and eating raw meat the human race would of been a pretty non exisitant thing. GW (taking the side for the moment that humans may have sped things up) is a by product of us existing. To blame 'us' is pretty narrow minded imo. Now, we, as the population need to adapt how we do things to help this continue. This has to be done through technology. To this end there was quite an interesting Lecture last night on BBC1 regarding creating artificial life with the sole purpose of generating energy, taking the carbon from carbon dioxide. Admittedly, its only an idea, but an idea from the guy who mapped his own genome, Dr J Craig Venter. Its all very well science trying to prove something, but maybe it should employ resources to fixing the problem! Or at least suggesting more than 'switching our lights of' - Mr X isn't going to want to switch his lights off, or turn his heating down when he turns the News on to see countries, both developed and developing, pumping tonnes of GHGs into the atmosphere. Part of the problem is "what can I do about it?" People live in such bubbled worlds that maybe they just don't see the bigger picture.

Living on Dartmoor, I think it would be a great idea. 360sq miles with a pop . of about 30,000, so plenty of space, forests, and food. Foxes kill lambs, buzzards kill lambs and pick their eyes out. They aren't shot indiscrimanetly. Why should wolves be any different? Besides, most of the domesticated livestock on the high moor is cattle, not sheep. Besides that the average farmer doesn't have the time to go searching for wolves (or foxes for that matter) ... leaving the hunts (which are supposedly banned) something tells me a dog would lose that battle.

My point was that government scientists grap the bone and run with it until something else comes along. The media, with nothing else to do tends to follow suit. Thankfully, most people are beginning to grasp that you can't believe everything someone else tells you, and that its best to find out things for yourself. Ergo, most people I talk to seem to be slightly wary re global warming and what exactly it is going to do... and lets be honest - no one does. If they can't get the weather right for the next few hours, one thinks they might struggle for the next few hundred years! Thats just my opinion. I'll recycle, i'll switch off lights, but im still going to drive to work, im still going to go on holiday in warm places (which according to some people I won't have to soon) and im still going to believe that this is just one of those things. Lets face it, the earth has been here for billions of years, pumping noxious gasses into the atmosphere at a huge rate, far worse than we could even contemplate, yet it had ice ages, little ice ages, warm periods, hot periods, some might say the world knows what its up to. It has afterall coped before. If however it doesn't, there are some great quick fixes being banded around, someone just needs to bite the goddamn bullet instead of 'well, we could do this, or we might do that' So in essence... oil problem - leave to industry, cooling leave to nature or, if a helping hand is needed, human intervention. I believe a few hundred million tonnes of sulphur at about 40km a.s.l would do the trick. Prof Crutzen certainly thinks so.

Im not convinced that economies will grind to a halt tbh. When the oil price becomes too high companies will invest in new technologies, this will form a new 'eco industry' that will replace jobs lost as a result of no one buying oil. It started to happen in the 1980's when oil supplies slowed up, but the govt got involved, the price dropped, companies figured it was cheaper to buy the oil again than invest in new technologies. So they didn't. Simple economics demands that governements do what they do best. Nothing. Let business and the economies take their course, take no prisoners. If things get tough, they get tough. But they'll get better. You can depict us in the 21st C with those back in history, but we have the knowledge now to cope, to adapt, to live on. Government intervention doesn't foster ideas, its restricts them. On the original topic re disbelief. Is it any wonder? In the 70's we were all doomed to a global cool down (temp wise) then we were all going to get mad cow disease, then we were all going to get sars, now maybe bird flu? If none of those get us, then 30C and fine wine growing in Scotland might? Shucks.

-24.3C over Scotland with -15C over Dartmoor, and record 1929 esque snowfalls (180cm) :lol: