Jump to content

Lorry Crash In George Square


Buffs

Recommended Posts

Show me where I said that?

BTW trees don't capture carbon. They capture carbon dioxide.

You reckon half of Brazil and much of Asia has been deforested so we can erect wind farms do you? lol.gif

A wee bit of education.

Trees aren't the biggest sinks of carbon dioxide. Oceans are.

It's why they are getting more acidic - excess carbon dioxide.

It's why ocean warming is a potential disaster.

Warming the seas by even a fraction releases vast quantities of that stored carbon dioxide.

That's the runaway scenario which scientists are worried about.

You do know that all of this has already happened between 7,500 and 16,000 years ago and guess what? Yep you got it - we're still here. I guess back then all those climate changes were down to all those bad Chalcolithic men driving around in their sports cars and flying the world in big aircraft. :rolleyes: The only thing scientists are worried about is where they'll get their next tranche of funding from and creating panic amongst idiots is a great source of easy money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


If you weren't so stupid you might have clicked on the link provided for the condition and saw what was actually there. :rolleyes:

I didn't need to, haven't you gathered that I have diabetes yet? Not enough clues for you? Ok, let me put this simply

1 You said that all of those conditions were reportable

2 I replied that at least one wasn't

3 You were wrong.

No amount of name calling or deflection removes that fact. Admit it, you were wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do know that all of this has already happened between 7,500 and 16,000 years ago and guess what? Yep you got it - we're still here.

Oh dear God, you're actually going with that argument? lol.gif

Seriously? Do you feel no embarassment whatsoever debating on this level?

I'll put you out of your misery.There isn't a person alive today who can be absolutely certain what happened 200 years ago let alone 16,000 years ago but let's give you the benefit of the doubt.

You are confusing natural equilibrium and the consequences of applying an unbalanced force to that equilibrium.

A natural equilibrium will usually recover as it clearly did if your scenario is taken as being correct.

As it was correcting itself 16,000 years ago or whatever, the climate had enough problems trying to correct the natural disturbance away from equilibrium (as Nature always tries to do). It had to use the full tools of nature to do so successfully or else we'd become the next Venus.

What the climate did not have to overcome was additional man-introduced billions of tonnes of a series of known global warming gases, destruction of swathes of the ozone layer from manmade alkylhalides, massive acidification and consequent warming of the oceans, the destruction of vast tracts of natural forestry of Brazil and Asia or a whole host of other damaging manmade equilibrium shifting triggers.

As an analogy, a cyclist riding a bike is in a kind of equilibrium as he tries to stay upright against random fluctuations in movement - just like the natural climate.

Manmade effects, tiny though they may may in comparison, are the equivalent of the bastard kid who chucks a stick on the spokes.

You are doing the equivalent of wondering why the cyclist came off the bike and broke his neck when he spent many years of happy cycling before the stick incident.

You are getting your arse handed to you on a plate over this.

Either get educated or get onto another topic.

Edited by oaksoft
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's an incident with a bus crash in Rowan St as I speak.According to local witnesses(gossips)the bus driver was slumped over the steering wheel as the bus took out a car!!!

Edited by HSS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh dear God, you're actually going with that argument? lol.gif

Seriously? Do you feel no embarassment whatsoever debating on this level?

I'll put you out of your misery.There isn't a person alive today who can be absolutely certain what happened 200 years ago let alone 16,000 years ago but let's give you the benefit of the doubt.

You are confusing natural equilibrium and the consequences of applying an unbalanced force to that equilibrium.

A natural equilibrium will usually recover as it clearly did if your scenario is taken as being correct.

As it was correcting itself 16,000 years ago or whatever, the climate had enough problems trying to correct the natural disturbance away from equilibrium (as Nature always tries to do). It had to use the full tools of nature to do so successfully or else we'd become the next Venus.

What the climate did not have to overcome was additional man-introduced billions of tonnes of a series of known global warming gases, destruction of swathes of the ozone layer from manmade alkylhalides, massive acidification and consequent warming of the oceans, the destruction of vast tracts of natural forestry of Brazil and Asia or a whole host of other damaging manmade equilibrium shifting triggers.

As an analogy, a cyclist riding a bike is in a kind of equilibrium as he tries to stay upright against random fluctuations in movement - just like the natural climate.

Manmade effects, tiny though they may may in comparison, are the equivalent of the bastard kid who chucks a stick on the spokes.

You are doing the equivalent of wondering why the cyclist came off the bike and broke his neck when he spent many years of happy cycling before the stick incident.

You are getting your arse handed to you on a plate over this.

Either get educated or get onto another topic.

Nice lecture.

What textbook can that found in, word for word?

:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't need to, haven't you gathered that I have diabetes yet? Not enough clues for you? Ok, let me put this simply

1 You said that all of those conditions were reportable

2 I replied that at least one wasn't

3 You were wrong.

No amount of name calling or deflection removes that fact. Admit it, you were wrong.

Oh FFS.

All of the conditions listed are reportable - even diabetes. :rolleyes: Given the news today that Mr Clarke may face charges brought by the DVLA Medical Director for non disclosure I do hope you have informed the DVLA about your learning disability :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh dear God, you're actually going with that argument? lol.gif

Seriously? Do you feel no embarassment whatsoever debating on this level?

I'll put you out of your misery.There isn't a person alive today who can be absolutely certain what happened 200 years ago let alone 16,000 years ago but let's give you the benefit of the doubt.

You are confusing natural equilibrium and the consequences of applying an unbalanced force to that equilibrium.

A natural equilibrium will usually recover as it clearly did if your scenario is taken as being correct.

As it was correcting itself 16,000 years ago or whatever, the climate had enough problems trying to correct the natural disturbance away from equilibrium (as Nature always tries to do). It had to use the full tools of nature to do so successfully or else we'd become the next Venus.

What the climate did not have to overcome was additional man-introduced billions of tonnes of a series of known global warming gases, destruction of swathes of the ozone layer from manmade alkylhalides, massive acidification and consequent warming of the oceans, the destruction of vast tracts of natural forestry of Brazil and Asia or a whole host of other damaging manmade equilibrium shifting triggers.

As an analogy, a cyclist riding a bike is in a kind of equilibrium as he tries to stay upright against random fluctuations in movement - just like the natural climate.

Manmade effects, tiny though they may may in comparison, are the equivalent of the bastard kid who chucks a stick on the spokes.

You are doing the equivalent of wondering why the cyclist came off the bike and broke his neck when he spent many years of happy cycling before the stick incident.

You are getting your arse handed to you on a plate over this.

Either get educated or get onto another topic.

Oh dear...

Well Oaksoft if you are that worried I know a company that will help you cut your energy consumption in return for a fee. I know it would be an easy number of my colleagues since you've already laughed off the idea that anyone could cut their energy consumption. I'd offer mates rates but I'm sorry, I'd prefer to keep stuff like that for people I actually like. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not according to the link you posted.

"Diabetes and driving

You may need to tell DVLA about your diabetes, depending on how it’s treated and the licence you have. Check with your nurse or doctor if you don’t know what type of medication you’re on."

So 'you may need to' in a lying bigots world means 'you must'.

Glad we cleared that up.

How many times? Diabetes is a reportable condition. That's why it' on the DVLA list.

Hopefully the DVLA are monitoring this thread. It'll be good to get so many people with such severe learning difficulties off the road. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh dear...

Well Oaksoft if you are that worried I know a company that will help you cut your energy consumption in return for a fee. I know it would be an easy number of my colleagues since you've already laughed off the idea that anyone could cut their energy consumption. I'd offer mates rates but I'm sorry, I'd prefer to keep stuff like that for people I actually like. rolleyes.gif

No idea what you're talking about here but I don't need to pay someone to show me how to switch off lights in my house.

Nice of you to realise you are out of your depth on the science.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No idea what you're talking about here but I don't need to pay someone to show me how to switch off lights in my house.

Nice of you to realise you are out of your depth on the science.

I'm not out my depth, I just realised that we were getting back into an area where it was futile arguing. Having an argument about global warming / climate change with someone like you is like arguing about evolution with a creationist.

We know the earth emerged from an ice age. We know that the climate constantly changes. We know this is natural and a force of nature. Yet still we get those mad King Kanutes who tell us if we only listen to them - not questioning their obvious financial motives - we'll be able to turn back the tide. They tell us, like you did, that history only began in the last few hundred years and that tropical storms, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, droughts and flooding are all man made problems caused by us angering mother nature by burning hydrocarbons - hydrocarbons that are a natural energy source provided by nature.

I'll leave to your beliefs. For me, my motivation is saving money. I like cutting energy consumption and improving the energy efficiency of our homes and work places. I enjoy the fact that my work means businesses can increase their profit margins without charging their customers more, or paying their staff less. My employer pays me well and we've seen the company value rocket as our impressive client list continues to grow. Now how are you getting on with the toilet duck this morning... :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many times? Diabetes is a reportable condition. That's why it' on the DVLA list.

Hopefully the DVLA are monitoring this thread. It'll be good to get so many people with such severe learning difficulties off the road. :rolleyes:

Oh ffs, I have diabetes. It's not reportable to DVLA. You're wrong. End of story.

And you accuse me of having learning difficulties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not out my depth, I just realised that we were getting back into an area where it was futile arguing. Having an argument about global warming / climate change with someone like you is like arguing about evolution with a creationist.

We know the earth emerged from an ice age. We know that the climate constantly changes. We know this is natural and a force of nature. Yet still we get those mad King Kanutes who tell us if we only listen to them - not questioning their obvious financial motives - we'll be able to turn back the tide. They tell us, like you did, that history only began in the last few hundred years and that tropical storms, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, droughts and flooding are all man made problems caused by us angering mother nature by burning hydrocarbons - hydrocarbons that are a natural energy source provided by nature.

I'll leave to your beliefs. For me, my motivation is saving money. I like cutting energy consumption and improving the energy efficiency of our homes and work places. I enjoy the fact that my work means businesses can increase their profit margins without charging their customers more, or paying their staff less. My employer pays me well and we've seen the company value rocket as our impressive client list continues to grow. Now how are you getting on with the toilet duck this morning... :rolleyes:

Again, I have no idea what that unstructured rant is all about or what drives it.

People need to decide whether to get their education about scientific matters from professional scientists or from deluded pipe fitters.

If they choose the latter then it's their own funeral. I believe my ego will survive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest TPAFKATS

Mr Clark decided not to say much........................shutup.gif

Following legal advice that's maybe helpful to him, but no-one else? Esp the relatives of those who died
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Following legal advice that's maybe helpful to him, but no-one else? Esp the relatives of those who died

The second the threat of private prosecution was made, this was always going to happen. The inquiry should be put on hold, and COPFS should prioritise a quick hearing to see if the prosecution is viable (it's not), and then continue with the inquiry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...