Recent comments by: Bigfoot
Burrs under my saddle
Ohbrillance, you're using the argument of a consensus in your defence but then turn around and say it means nothing when I use it. A bit hypocritical don't you think ?
And no one is saying climate change is not real, OF CAUSE ITS REAL and entirely natural, climate change is CONSTANTLY occurring but that's where we part company. Your ideas about climate change are alarmist unscientific drivel that come from a comic book, my ideas about climate change are based on scientific common sense and observable evidence for all to see. Your arguments wouldn't hold up in a primary school essay.
Its looking more by the day that your out numbered Nico.The average man in the street has seen through the CO2 scam and its showing on sites like this. The evidence in the real world is there for all to see, dangerous global warming or climate change from climbing atmospheric carbon dioxide levels is a total fraud. Atmospheric carbon dioxide does NOTHING but make earths plants grow better, basic botany.
Still waiting jeffito. Which will get me first, the fire ants or the climate alarmists? I hope its not the climate alarmists, my wife might have something to say about that.
Very real threats, dogsbody? Yes both fire ants and climate alarmists are both very real threats, you got that right.
Fire ants, like climate alarmists, a real problem. I know what they can do with all that evil CO2 now, gas the little buggers. The fire ants I mean, and perhaps...
Strong disbelief in the observable facts reminds me of denialism, Jeffito. And you're in denial. I am also fascinated by your denialism of real science and your crude comment, how low can you go, Jeffito?
If Nasa are cooking the books on one thing how can you trust them about anything else.
The latest climate science from Nasa.
http://www.davidicke.co m/headlines/mind-blowing-temperat ure-fraud-from-nasa-in-greenland/
This guy has really lost it , no wonder Britain is in so much trouble.
Susan, do you really expect readers to take any notice of you when all you can come up with is a straw mans argument?
Clearly you have no answers for me, try to put some effort into getting your facts right.
Nico you seem oblivious to the fact that 100 years is not a very long record . You also seem incapable of understanding anything about the climate before 100 years ago during the entire Holocene interglacial or any of the past glaciations or interglacials. Your totally focused on the last 100 years which is just a speck of time and is still stable. It will become " instable" when the Holocene interglacial ends and we go into the next great glaciation. Any serious suggestion that the climate has become "instable" in the last 100 years due to any minor warming is off their rocker.
Susan I made no such assertion, and I notice like your close mate Nico that you avoid the question. Is that because Susan that you know as well as I do that there has been no warming in the last 20 years ?
Well susan perhaps you can enlighten us then , how much has the planet warmed in the last 20 years ? Your close mate Nico seems totally incapable of answering this simple question.
CO2 obviously has little to do with global temps Oliver and whether it warms or cools as there has been NO global warming in the last 20 years but in that 20 years we have seen about 1/3 of the entire atmospheric carbon dioxide rise ( from natural and human sources ) since the 1800s. So me thinks the CAGW theory from human emissions of CO2 is dead and buried. All CO2 is just harmless plant food that makes my tomatoes grow better the more there is.
Still pushing hyperbolic crap, Helen?
Why does Shorten and his lot want to take us back 200 years with his insane ideas ? Please tell me we are not going to blight the landscape with thousands and thousands and acres and acres of wind turbines from one end of the country to the other ? To be a blight on the visual landscape forever or for as long as they stand which will be well after they have worn out in 15 years.