amancalledchuda

In this question I am *NOT* trying to suggest that Global Warming actually *is* natural (is that sufficiently clear to everyone?) I’m asking whether, if we *pretend* for a moment that it is completely natural, would we still think that it would be a catastrophe for the planet?

I have a sneaking suspicion that, if the warming were natural, people would be saying “Oh good, I like warmer whether!”

Thus I believe that the warming is irrelevant to most people. What’s important is the “man is causing it” part.

Is the Global Warming Alarmism, therefore, more about being anti-human, anti-technology, anti-development, etc?

In February, the U.K. Government decided that all British school children should be forced to watch Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth, without any warnings about how exaggerated and one-sided the film is.

A British judge has just ruled that they must be given such a warning. (See... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/new... )

He has stated that the film *does* promote "partisan political views", and that children should be warned that there are other opinions on global warming and they should not necessarily accept the views of the film.

Global Warming Alarmists say that An Inconvenient Truth ‘got the basic fact right’, but if the rest of the film is now officially labelled as promoting a political agenda can we finally agree that the film is *not* to be recommended as a good source of information regarding climate change?

Comments?

Global Warming Alarmist dana recently asked two questions suggesting that GW sceptics (“deniers” as he insists on calling them) are ignorant and make unsupported claims. (See… http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ag... and… http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=As... )

In answering those questions, I pointed out that dana himself was just as guilty of this, and cited as proof the fact that he has quoted the flawed Mann hockey stick graph and claimed that James Hansen’s 1988 guesses of how much temperature would rise by 2000 were “extremely accurate”.

Dana didn’t respond to me in the questions themselves, but subsequently contacted me direct with the following…

I was debating with Bob regarding this question, but, bizarrely, the question got suddenly deleted.

So, let’s continue it here…

I said that the MWP was anything up to 4°C warmer than today.

Bob replied “your claim that we were 4 C warmer then is made up denier nonsense.” And then gave a link to ten studies.

I would respond to that with…

For a start, what I actually said was “anything up to 4°C warmer” not “we were 4°C warmer” – not the same thing at all.

Made up denier nonsense? That's simply not true. co2science lists over 30 studies that suggest the MWP was warmer than today’s temperatures. (See… http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/da... ) That’s 3 times as many as your “ten studies”.

I'm just listening to James O'Brien on LBC and he just pointed out the quote from the Bible that "...God so loved the world, that He gave his only-begotten Son..." is not actually that impressive, because Jesus "rose again" on the third day, so God only lost His son for a long weekend, and He's had Him sitting at His right hand ever since.

So He didn't actually give very much at all, did He?

So He can't love the world very much then, can He?

I've just been reading about Noah's Ark ( http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v19/i2/an... ) and the claim that it was about 140m long. So, I was wondering, with the exception of Noah's Ark, when did mankind achieve the technology to produce a 140m+ ship?

For example, login details. My friend and I login to the same website every day using the same login details. On her PC it remebers her login ID, on mine it doesn't.

On other sites, it does remember my login ID, so there must be a per-page setting somewhere.

What setting do I need to change?

You often hear people blaming their metabolism for the fact that they are over-weight. Is there any basis of truth in this excuse?

Physics taught me that energy cannot be created or destroyed, only converted from one form to another.

So, if two people are eating the same number of calories (and do the same amount of exercise), but one is getting fat (because of a problem with their metabolism) and the other isn't, then how is the fat person managing to do the same amount of work using less energy - thus allowing them to store the excess energy as fat?

The mother of a friend of mine has apple trees in her garden and has grown them for many years. She has even grafted on branches of other species to give more variety (I didn't even know you could do that before I met her!)

Anyway, this year her apples have been terrible. They have all either rotted on the branch, or have been attacked and eaten by various "worms".

What do you recommend she does next year to prevent this from happening again?

Can someone who is fully conversant with the UK Data Protection Act tell me whether I am correct in the following belief:

That if I inform a company or organisation that holds personal data about me that the data they hold is inaccurate, provide them with the correct information and ask them to change their data, that the Data Protection Act says they must do it.

Second, that if they fail to do it, continue to act upon the incorrect data and I suffer as a result, this is a breach of the Data Protection Act and I could prosecute them for this breach.

Or have I got it completely wrong?

Ok, further to my last question, here's the next one...

How much has the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere increased over the last 100 years?

I would like to get a feel for what the average person (who doesn't already know the true figures) thinks the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere is.

Let us assume for simplicity that there were 100 "units" of CO2 100 years ago. How many are there today? So if you think it's still the same, you would say 100. If you think it's increased by 1% you'd say 101. 10% = 110, if you think it's inceased 10 times, you'd say 1000, etc.

So, what do you think?

Please, please, please, if you know the answer, or have looked it up, don't post the true figure here.

What percentage of the atmosphere is CO2?

I would like to get a feel for what the average person (who doesn't already know the true figures) thinks the percentage of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is.

We are being bombarded with hype from the global warming scare mongerers about rising CO2 levels, so what do you think the figures are.

Please, please, please, if you know the answer, or have looked it up, don't post the true figure here.

Thanks.

Is it true that the USA is the only nation that uses the MM/DD/YYYY date format and if so, why?

Generally, I've had answers along the lines of "Torque is the 'turning power' of the engine", but what does that mean? Why isn't the max 'turning power' of the engine at the point of max power?

If a given engine delivers max torque at say 3500 revs and max power at say 7000 revs, where would I want to keep the revs to get maximum acceleration? Why?