Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#141
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 01:48:12 -0700, Alex Terrell wrote:
yes the railways could still run fine, but not in their current state. Bit like now then? |
#142
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 16:19:06 +0100, Alan J. Flavell wrote:
We got the "Red Dwarf" version of the future instead. :-{ We're heading for the futurama version, everything exactly the same, but worse. Advets beamed into you brain etc. |
#143
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#144
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Terry Harper" wrote in message
... "John Mullen" wrote in message ... "Terry Harper" wrote in message ... Global warming is real, but it's a natural phenomenon, not man-made. Are you unable to answer this question? If not, please do. The answer was given in another post. See http://dmiweb.dmi.dk/fsweb/solarterr.../welcome.shtml The URL you give contradicts what you say! "Global warming is real, but it's a natural phenomenon, not man-made." (You) "While the curves do not match perfectly at any time, they start to diverge noticeably by the 1980's. We interpret this widening gap as evidence for an additional influence on the temperature - over and above what the Sun is causing. We think this is likely to be due to the anthropogenic greenhouse effect" (Your ref above) So now I am confused. What do you in fact believe? What you said above? Or what your reference said? John |
#145
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Paul Weaver" wrote in message
news ![]() On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 20:26:30 +0100, John Mullen wrote: What a stupid post! Oh no! Caught out by such a witty and yet surpsingly verbose reply Yup. You certainly were. Never mind, keep trying... John |
#146
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"John Mullen" wrote in message
... "Terry Harper" wrote in message ... The answer was given in another post. See http://dmiweb.dmi.dk/fsweb/solarterr.../welcome.shtml The URL you give contradicts what you say! "Global warming is real, but it's a natural phenomenon, not man-made." (You) "While the curves do not match perfectly at any time, they start to diverge noticeably by the 1980's. We interpret this widening gap as evidence for an additional influence on the temperature - over and above what the Sun is causing. We think this is likely to be due to the anthropogenic greenhouse effect" (Your ref above) So now I am confused. What do you in fact believe? What you said above? Or what your reference said? Did you look at the first graph on the page, and read what it says about it? They don't know why there is a recent divergence. They are postulating. Man-made additions to the CO2 in the atmosphere did not suddenly start in the 1980s. -- Terry Harper, Web Co-ordinator, The Omnibus Society 75th Anniversary 2004, see http://www.omnibussoc.org/75th.htm E-mail: URL: http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/ |
#147
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"KW" wrote in message ...
"Annabel Smyth" wrote in message ... Surely every sort of weather is blamed on global warming, whether hot, cold, wet, dry or anything in between? I'm told that in the USA, all weather is blamed on El Nino or La Nina - here, of course, those particular phenomena are also blamed on global warming! There is NO doubt at all about Globalwarming otherwise we would still be in the last Iceage. Having said that it rained extremely hard yesterday (Wednesday) evening in Bolton. If we then compare this with the day I passed my driving test which was a Wednesday afternoon in August 1967. It also rained so heavily for the windscreen wipers on my Reliant Mk5 that I had to take refuge under a railway bridge in Preston (Returning from Blackpool). Therefore I conclude that the "peak" of the globalwarming cycle has passed and we are now on a downwards spiral to the next Iceage. By eck its cowd up t'north! KW I did about global warming in Geography at A level but can't remember the specifics (must be because I killed a few brain cels celebrating on Thursday night) so I won't try to sound clever by trying to contribute to the signs of global warming. What I will say is that we've been having some fairly extreme weather in the north west (and the rest of the country for that matter). As the weather forecast described it, the conditions have been cyclonic. What I thought I'd put on the topic of extreme weather was that I witnessed a rather interesting but at the same time unnerving sight on my way home last night. There was a tornado trying to form over where I live at about 9 o'clock yesterday evening. It started off as a tube coming out of the cloud at an angle of about 35 degrees. It then formed a funnel shape but dispersed. It then managed to reform itself but now heading straight downwards. You could see the bottom of it heading further down from the clouds and you could see it starting to look like the classic funnel shape. At the same time you could watch it moving across the base of the cloud - it was easily visible because it looked light grey against the greenish looking cloud that it was coming out of. Fortunately it dispersed before getting too far towards the ground and so I'm sure people directly underneath it were oblivious to its presence. Still, this is a sight that I've never witnessed before and wouldn't want to witness again in any hurry. What I'd be interested to know is how regular are these sort of events (bearing in mind that had this tornado actually got to the ground, I would say it looked more powerful than an F1). Do these monsters get to a point where they are self sustaining? This one certainly appeared to be 'trying' to work itself up to something. |
#148
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Lukipela" wrote in message
m... There was a tornado trying to form over where I live at about 9 o'clock yesterday evening. I saw one of these when I was in the Lake District in approx 1980. It looked to reach all the way to the ground, but I was a long way off, so I can't be sure. I wouldn't worry too much about it, I don't think they have much power when they form at British latitudes. -- John Rowland - Spamtrapped Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001 http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood. That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line - It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes |
#149
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Terry Harper" wrote in message
... "John Mullen" wrote in message ... "Terry Harper" wrote in message ... The answer was given in another post. See http://dmiweb.dmi.dk/fsweb/solarterr.../welcome.shtml The URL you give contradicts what you say! "Global warming is real, but it's a natural phenomenon, not man-made." (You) "While the curves do not match perfectly at any time, they start to diverge noticeably by the 1980's. We interpret this widening gap as evidence for an additional influence on the temperature - over and above what the Sun is causing. We think this is likely to be due to the anthropogenic greenhouse effect" (Your ref above) So now I am confused. What do you in fact believe? What you said above? Or what your reference said? Did you look at the first graph on the page, and read what it says about it? I looked at both graphs and the accompanying story, a few months ago in the New Scientist, and again yesterday. Neither supports what you are trying to make it support. They don't know why there is a recent divergence. They are postulating. Man-made additions to the CO2 in the atmosphere did not suddenly start in the 1980s. Indeed not. If the scientific mainstream (say 9 out of 10 scientists who study this kind of thing for a living), and also the article *you* chose to highlight your argument, both disagree with you, please do tell why your opinion is nonetheless right. John |
#150
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
"Sling him under a train" | London Transport | |||
"Sling him under a train" | London Transport | |||
Kings Cross fire (1987) : final victim named | London Transport | |||
1987 King's Cross fire victim named | London Transport | |||
Bus stop sign covered and marked 'not in use' and a temporary bus stop sign right next to it | London Transport |