In The News

[Devonian]

So true Mr Sausage.....

BTW That's another potty in the replies. Wasn't me....

You're more than one person?

[Village]

And this is the thing for me. Instead of going 'well we can't prove it so let's just carry on', surely it's better to say 'Ok, we can't prove it, but it's not a good idea to pollute and consume at the current rate like we are anyway, so how about we do the best we can so that 20 years down the line if we find out that actually we do have a big effect we can at least know that we have tried our best to slow down the process and keep this beautiful planet going for a little longer'?

What on earth do we have to lose by doing the latter? Nothing, as far as i can see.

In that case I personally think you are missing the whole point. We have absolutely everything to lose.

Some talk of the precautionary principal. However, in being cautious in whatever we do we should be mindful that we dont slow up the speed of development because in doing so we may just miss the most precautionary aspect of our time here.

In simple terms ......when that next Meteor makes a direct hit, or when volcanic activity rises to overproduce atmospheric mercury levels or during the pole reversal when all life may well become infertile as gama radiation levels increase....There will be no rejoicing at having cut CO2 output at the expence of our only chance to have mastered a sustainable living alternative in space.

You can cry all you like then but it will be too late, even if it does finally dawn on some that the real meaning of the precautionary principal was hyjacked and valuable time was lost.

Heres another one for you to get your mind around......To help others....first one must help oneself!

We should make sure that we have our own insurance in the bag first before we look to save anything else. Its a dangerous planet we live on and currently we have no way to escape it. You can worry about what we may or may not do to the planet ourselves or whether one theory may or may not upset the climate. But dont forget that the main concern is not a theory...it is a fact...we can be wiped out by a tremendous upheavel at any time, this should be our real concern. No maybe's, we know from the past that something will happen again, its just a matter of time.

This is our time, we should not waste it while we have the chance.

Edited January 6, 2012 by Village

[Lauren]

So you think what we have to lose by not taken precautions is being wiped out by something massive? Not being funny, but you could argue that no matter what we do we can never be totally safe against a major extinction event (by which i mean a huge asteroid, sun exploding etc) anyway, we simply will never have that much power.

And i don't agree you should help yourself before helping anyone else. The world will never get anywhere like that, No one will ever be good enough by their own standards to warrent helping anybody else by using that logic. The way forward is for everybody to help eachother.

To be honest your theory holds no more water than the other main ones, I don't know how you can be so sure you're right.

[Village]

Yes, we will be safe from whatever befits this planet in future years if we have the alternative to get off and away.

Please remind me that I never want to be a passenger on a plane next to you when there is a sudden loss in cabin pressure. Clearly you wont be able to help anyone with their oxgen mask because you wasted time not ensuring that you first had fitted yours.

Its the first principal in any emergency. You failed.

[Lauren]

Village, don't patronise me.

You can be greedy and just look for another planet to live on and then do exactly the same thing all over again, but I'd much rather at least TRY and see if we can live and do our best to look after the ONLY PLANET WE CURRENTLY HAVE.

That doesn't mean we can't progress, it's not an either or situation. All i know is I don't want to pursue a goal to creating a new planet to live on and throw everything into it at the expense of everything else and then find out that actually doing that has actually sped up the process of degredation and I've run out of time to find an alternative. That would then leave essentially dying in a pit of my own s**t. I'd rather take a little longer to reach that goal, but actually reach it and then I'd also have the plus of being able to use what I've learned to make my future planet a much nicer and longer exisiting place to live.

[pottyprof]

You're more than one person?

Apparently so.... I have an inner me that is more environmentally friendly than the outer me shows. I wonder if I can send him my bills to pay?

[Devonian]

Apparently so.... I have an inner me that is more environmentally friendly than the outer me shows. I wonder if I can send him my bills to pay?

Ahh, I see what you meant :blush:

[Village]

Village, don't patronise me.

You can be greedy and just look for another planet to live on and then do exactly the same thing all over again, but I'd much rather at least TRY and see if we can live and do our best to look after the ONLY PLANET WE CURRENTLY HAVE.

That doesn't mean we can't progress, it's not an either or situation. All i know is I don't want to pursue a goal to creating a new planet to live on and throw everything into it at the expense of everything else and then find out that actually doing that has actually sped up the process of degredation and I've run out of time to find an alternative. That would then leave essentially dying in a pit of my own s**t. I'd rather take a little longer to reach that goal, but actually reach it and then I'd also have the plus of being able to use what I've learned to make my future planet a much nicer and longer exisiting place to live.

Lauren, its got nothing to do with being greedy. Thats your skew, thats simply what you are saying now because you have a comfortable existence right now.

Its about looking after the human race ... you can pretend all you like that you prefer to put the likes of butterfles, rats, moles, trees, lesser spotted tad poles and the like but it doesnt wash with me.

When the chips are down you will do everything in your powers to put yourself first and ensure your survival. If you dont do this then you will be letting the whole of us down...your species. Pretend all you like but you will choose your survival over everything else right up until your last desperate gasp for air. I have no doubt about this whatsoever. You have the same affliction that we all do, its the way all living things are programed, you have no choice in the matter....you will put yourself first ... the rest is just hot air. You dont kid me.

Edited January 6, 2012 by Village

[Gray-Wolf]

Not a great believer in 'altruism 'then V? Any altruistic act is serving a mental disorder......Very 'House'.....

[knocker]

You have the same affliction that we all do, its the way all living things are programed, you have no choice in the matter....you will put yourself first ... the rest is just hot air. You dont kid me.

That of course is absolute nonsense as there are many cases in natural selection when the opposite is true. Take ants. Altruistic behaviour has been documented in many ways. To start the great majority of ant workers make no effort to reproduce at all. Although the ovaries of young individuals are often active, the eggs they produce are more often than not trophic, used to feed the larvae and the queen, and unable to develop even if left unharmed. The older workers, for various reasons, live an average 14 days.

They as living creatures are programmed to put themselves first? I think not. You don't kid me. Sounds a bit like predestination to me rather than any scientific knowledge. I should have twigged this a few days ago proof that my senility is more advanced than I thought.

Edited January 6, 2012 by weather ship

[VillagePlank]

Not a great believer in 'altruism 'then V? Any altruistic act is serving a mental disorder......Very 'House'.....

'House' would use the precautionary principle because it makes logical sense.

Village is, well, an idiot and he's devoid of any useful logic. It's why I changed my name from VillagePlank ...

Worse, still, is that I sit on the same side of the fence as him - as you well know - I am totally embarassed and I can assure you I do not subscribe to almost everything he says. As I've said that guy is intellectually challenged beyond all belief. (as am I) At least I try my best to approach the subject nominally scientifically. Guess I've lost it with this character, huh?

Where's all the good throwing scientific papers gone? I used to love being proven completely wrong and challenged by how much an idiot I really am! This diatribe, is, frankly, disturbing, and it's everywhere. It's like a virus. It will spread invidiously, and it needs to be stopped. Now. It's not skepticism, it's cynicism, and I abhor it.

I think they used to call it being a troll years ago ...

(I'm sure the moderators will point out that Village is entitled to his views. Well, yes - if it's legal, not libellous nor slander etc etc At then end of the day, I can't help it if the guy has an IQ of 80???)

Edited January 6, 2012 by Boar Wrinklestorm

[Lauren]

Village, you are still thinking so black and white, like this has to be an either or thing.

In reality you can make progress and protect things at the same time.

Of course my own survival is important, but I also acknowledge that my own survival (jn terms of my species) will be longer if I look after the very things that are keeping me alive to begin with (the oceans, the rainforests to name but a few).

You can be altruistic and work towards some sort of common goal. In fact I'm pretty sure that if all the nations pout their heads together and did this we would get somewhere a lot faster, but that's not realistic.

[Methuselah]

Just a minor point: no meteor has ever hit or will ever hit. Meteorites do, have and will...So, if you're intent on patronizing folks, Village, please get your facts right first...Please?

[laserguy]

Just a minor point: no meteor has ever hit or will ever hit. Meteorites do, have and will...

Ah but Pete,every meteorite is a meteor until the moment it hits the ground. There's so much hair-splitting going off here that I've clean forgot what the hell everyone is arguing about...

[Methuselah]

Ah but Pete,every meteorite is a meteor until the moment it hits the ground. There's so much hair-splitting going off here that I've clean forgot what the hell everyone is arguing about...

You are right, of course, Barrie!! :lol:

[VillagePlank]

What's a bolide, then?

[Methuselah]

What's a bolide, then?

Bolides to you too!

[knocker]

Harp seals on thin ice after 32 years of warming

DURHAM, N.C -- Warming in the North Atlantic over the last 32 years has significantly reduced winter sea ice cover in harp seal breeding grounds, resulting in sharply higher death rates among seal pups in recent years, according to a new Duke University-led study.

"The kind of mortality we're seeing in eastern Canada is dramatic. Entire year-classes may be disappearing from the population in low ice years – essentially all of the pups die," said David W. Johnston, research scientist at the Duke University Marine Lab. "It calls into question the resilience of the population."

The study, published today in the peer-reviewed journal PLoS ONE, is the first to show that seasonal sea ice cover in all four harp seal breeding regions in the North Atlantic has declined by as much as 6 percent per decade since 1979, when satellite records of ice conditions in the region began.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-01/du-hso010312.php

[4wd]

seasonal sea ice cover in all four harp seal breeding regions in the North Atlantic has declined by as much as 6 percent per decade since 1979, when satellite records of ice conditions in the region began.

Up to 6% per decade, so not much then, about 20% or rather 'up to' 20%

[laserguy]

What's a bolide, then?

"Bolide" was a term often used in the motorcycle press,especially in the late '70's to describe a large,heavy and unfeasibly fast bike which due to the aformentioned properties was prone to crashing into stationary objects. Quite apt,I think!

[Village]

Harp seals on thin ice after 32 years of warming

DURHAM, N.C -- Warming in the North Atlantic over the last 32 years has significantly reduced winter sea ice cover in harp seal breeding grounds, resulting in sharply higher death rates among seal pups in recent years, according to a new Duke University-led study.

"The kind of mortality we're seeing in eastern Canada is dramatic. Entire year-classes may be disappearing from the population in low ice years – essentially all of the pups die," said David W. Johnston, research scientist at the Duke University Marine Lab. "It calls into question the resilience of the population."

The study, published today in the peer-reviewed journal PLoS ONE, is the first to show that seasonal sea ice cover in all four harp seal breeding regions in the North Atlantic has declined by as much as 6 percent per decade since 1979, when satellite records of ice conditions in the region began.

http://www.eurekaler...u-hso010312.php

Isnt this the same country where annual Seal pup clubbing is legal?

[Gray-Wolf]

Slim pickings for them now eh V.? I think you'll find the 'fish' that are reason for the Cull are now moving north with temps so it's a double whammy for them there? Anyhoo's let's think about those poor polar bear cubs ( not ones filmed in zoo's) who depend upon pups and mum's to put on fat for the winter? maybe they;ll migrate North to take on the Walrus corpses killed in stampedes now that they are massing on beaches due to the lack of 'ice rafts' over their shell fishing grounds??? Then this is only a short term respite as there comes a point where Walrus numbers will fall due to the lack of juveniles making it to breeding age?

Edited January 8, 2012 by Gray-Wolf

[jethro]

A new study has found that wind power is unreliable and does not give value for money.

"But wind power is unreliable and requires back-up gas power stations to maintain a consistent electricity supply, the Civitas think-tank study found.

It means energy users pay twice – once for the ‘window-dressing’ of renewables and again for fossil fuels the energy sector continues to rely on."

Read more:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2084046/Wind-power-does-value-money-unreliable-requires-gas-stations.html#ixzz1ix9GDVtT

[Gray-Wolf]

I've always suspected why the Conservative govt of the 80's/90's pushed 'wind power' above all other alternative sources? It is the most impacting (after coal fired/nuclear stations) of the power stations and is placed in areas where folk will raise merry hell about them.

Strangely reminds me of the 74/75' studies during the oil crises where the Heath Govt. messed with the 'figures' to make 'Nuclear' the most attractive option (11 out of 13 'experts ' consulted where in the pay of the nuclear industry!!!).

Tidal (year around and twice daily,geothermal (how many Batholiths underly Great Britain???) and subsidiary solar seemed, and seems, the best way forward. Of course we may find 'new' sources become most appealing esp. following the fusion path.

[jethro]

Tidal always seems like the biggest missed opportunity. Trouble is it's beset with enormous ecological problems which certainly around these parts, seem insurmountable. The fight for a Severn Estuary barrier is an ongoing battle, no one willing or able to give any ground from either side of the battle. In the meantime, Hinkley Point seems likely to get a new nuclear reactor.