RICHPLANET.NET FORUM : WE ARE NOT ADMITTING NEW MEMBERS AT THIS POINT IN TIME.  THIS IS DUE TO PREVIOUS TROLLS ATTACKING THE FORUM.<br>
There is still no decision on whether new members will be added.  This can only happen when suitable moderators are in place, who are not easy to find for obvious reasons. www.richplanet.net community built on miniBB / RICHPLANET.NET FORUM : WE ARE NOT ADMITTING NEW MEMBERS AT THIS POINT IN TIME. THIS IS DUE TO PREVIOUS TROLLS ATTACKING THE FORUM.
There is still no decision on whether new members will be added. This can only happen when suitable moderators are in place, who are not easy to find for obvious reasons.
/

ENVIRONMENT

 Page:  ««  1  2  ...  8  9  10  11  12  ...  97  98  »» 
Starseed
Guest
#136 | Posted: 19 Oct 2010 16:56
Reply 
Chris Huhne's favourite yoghurt ingredient


fuckwit chris huhne...

"Whichever way you look at it, £1 billion is a lot of money. That is £1,000,000,000.00, and it is our money – more money than you and I will ever see, or ever dream of earning. It is a sum of money that would buy 150,000 hip replacement operations. It would pay the energy bills for two million pensioners for a full year, or pay the university fees for 600,000 students. More specifically, and of some personal interest, it would pay for 100,000 life-saving heart operations.

Yet the fuckwit pictured is going to take that amount of money from us to play around stripping plant food from coal-fired electricity generation and bury it deep in a hole in the ground.

This man, therefore, will – indirectly – be responsible for many deaths, lost in "opportunity costs". The money frittered away on this moronic enterprise cannot be spent on life-saving functions. And we do not have the money to spare. If we waste this money, it is not available for anything else. People will die because of this action."

A fantastic article:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100059574/chris-huhnes-favourite-yo ghurt-ingredient/
dreamkatcher
Member
#137 | Posted: 19 Oct 2010 17:20
Reply 
Ive just spoken to my friend, who works with Rosalind Peterson, & she tells me that Rosalind calls chemtrails "consistent jet contrails." People listen to that. People who dont believe in chemtrails.

dk
Starseed
Guest
#138 | Posted: 19 Oct 2010 17:42
Reply 
Ha Ha! Who is Rosalind Peterson??? Who cares what she says? Does she have any FACTS at hand?
Starseed
Guest
#139 | Posted: 19 Oct 2010 17:52
Reply 
THANKS FOR THIS DK:

dreamkatcher:
Ive just spoken to my friend, who works with Rosalind Peterson, & she tells me that Rosalind calls chemtrails "consistent jet contrails." People listen to that. People who dont believe in chemtrails.

dk

Now I know who she is LOL!


Rosalind Peterson on the Infowarror Show

Miles Muzio Chief Meteorologist KBAK-TV CBS 29 News Bakersfield California This is an ongoing controversy with some people who insist a malevolent conspiracy is subliminally gassing Americans. I have found no credible evidence of this. Condensation trails are common and form as a function of temperature. Condensation nuclei are produced by hydrocarbon exhaust and quickly form ice fog in the high atmosphere. The colder it is at flight level the more persistent the ice fog is. There are really three types of fog (which are manifest as clouds aloft): 1) regular water droplet fog at temperatures above freezing, 2) water droplet fog at temperatures below freezing (which can result in icing conditions for aircraft), and 3) ice crystal fog (ice fog). Ice fog generally forms at temperatures below -22F. In arctic towns during the dead of winter it is not unusual to have ice fog form behind cars on the road. Ice fog dissipates very slowly because it must sublime from solid to vapor which requires a molecular heat transfer of about 540 calories per gram. At extremely low temperatures in the 30,000 to 40,000 foot range (between -60 and -100 degrees F), the change of state can take some time. When I was a military meteorologist in Alaska back in the 1970s, one of the routine forecasts I put out was a contrails prediction. It was something that dated back to World War II. Our bombers needed to know at what altitude they must fly in order to NOT produce contrails. Of course, there was radar back then and the Japanese probably could spot an incoming B-29, but perhaps not. If contrails were visible 100 miles away then everyone would know. Nomograms were developed for the prediction. It was fairly straight forward. A critical temperature and pressure was required for contrail formation, usually something like -45F. Humidity came into the equation for relatively warm temperatures, but once it got below about -70F humidity didnt matter- ice clouds would form regardless. When you see jets in which the contrail forms for only a short distance behind the aircraft and then it quickly disappears- that means the jet is flying at an altitude close to the critical contrail temperature. I can also tell you that the manner in which contrails disperse, or dont disperse reveals important information about atmospheric stability and diffluence. The same is true about lenticular clouds that form in Tehachapi. These mountain wave clouds dont automatically form when its windy. There are several other considerations, such as stability, humidity and the wind angle relation to the mountain range. In the same way contrails will expand in areas of diffluent flow (winds pulling apart over a horizontal area). Much of this also applies to steam or exhaust that is released from a common smoke stack in breezy conditions. If the smoke goes up or if it goes down, if it expands or if it stays uniform- all tell a story about the character of the atmosphere. So when contrails form an X in the sky, it means there are two persistent contrails behind aircraft with tracks at 90-degrees to each other- nothing more.

LOL

Watch this it says it all:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-OkqYA56Ys

"What a great video. Every time Rosalind Peterson opens her mouth, she proves her ignorance. And so many people follow everything she says. It's disgusting!"


"I have to tell ya, I just can't watch it past where she starts babbling. It's painful to hear this influential woman get it all so wrong!"

Oh, yes, she`s a good one alright - Belly laugh... She gets her arse handed to her here.
Starseed
Guest
#140 | Posted: 19 Oct 2010 17:55
Reply 
BTW - I just posted it where it should be - CHEMTRAILS - not here.
Starseed
Guest
#141 | Posted: 21 Oct 2010 16:47
Reply 
'Biodiversity': the new Big Lie

'Consider this summary of the UN's two-week Convention On Biodiversity, launched on Monday:

Delegates from nearly 200 countries are being asked to agree to new 2020 targets after governments largely failed to meet a 2010 target of achieving a significant reduction in biological diversity losses, a goal set at the last biodiversity conference in 2002. And one of the same issues that led to failure the first time around could jeopardize this meeting: money.
Developing nations say more funding is needed from developed countries to share the effort in saving nature. Much of the world's remaining biological diversity is in developing nations such as Brazil, Indonesia and in central Africa.'

Do you see what's going on here?

OK. Here's an even bigger clue. Here's something, unbeknownst to the world's taxpayers and free citizens, which the UN technocrats stitched together in June.

More: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100060132/biodiversity-the-new-big- lie/
Starseed
Guest
#142 | Posted: 21 Oct 2010 20:29
Reply 
To a Geologist, "The Past is Key to the Future."
Written by Steve Goddard
Thursday, 21 October 2010 14:07
In order to understand recent behavior of polar ice and have some visibility into the future, we need to look at it from an historical perspective. A good place to start the investigation is Greenland, which is often described by official sources as experiencing a meltdown. The BBC has famously warned us "If the ice cap were to completely disappear, global sea levels would rise by 6.5m (21 feet)."


The Climate Change Doctrine is Part of Environmentalism, Not of Science
Written by President Vαclav Klaus
Thursday, 21 October 2010 12:08
The current debate is a public policy debate with enormous implications. It is no longer about climate. It is about the government, the politicians, their scribes and the lobbyists who want to get more decision making and power for themselves. It seems to me that the widespread acceptance of the global warming dogma has become one of the main, most costly and most undemocratic public policy mistakes in generations. The previous one was communism.


Unsound Advice
Written by Christopher Monckton of Brenchley
Thursday, 21 October 2010 10:22
On 6 September 2010, Dr. John Holdren, President Obama's science advisor, gave a speech in Oslo, Norway, entitled Climate-Change Science and Policy: What Do We Know? What Should We Do? The speech contained numerous scientific errors and exaggerations, all pointing towards invention of a "climate crisis" where none exists, and overstatement of those problems that may exist.

READ MORE: http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/
dreamkatcher
Member
#143 | Posted: 22 Oct 2010 08:51
Reply 
Starseed:
Ha Ha! Who is Rosalind Peterson??? Who cares what she says? Does she have any FACTS at hand?

QUOTE: "What a great video. Every time Rosalind Peterson opens her mouth, she proves her ignorance. And so many people follow everything she says. It's disgusting!"


"I have to tell ya, I just can't watch it past where she starts babbling. It's painful to hear this influential woman get it all so wrong!"

Oh, yes, she`s a good one alright - Belly laugh... She gets her arse handed to her here.

******************************************************************

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/you/article-1296796/James-Delingpoles-talks-struggle- depression.html


Touche
Starseed
Guest
#144 | Posted: 22 Oct 2010 17:29
Reply 
'Let them eat vegetables' says the Eton Grocer's eco-fascist quango




This is one of those days when I'm so wracked with despair about the uselessness of our Coalition government that I don't know where to begin.

Should one take the North line and keep hammering it hard on the fact that, far from slashing costs it is actually expanding Big Government and squandering our money on DFID civil servants, foreign despots and climate change scams?

Should one point out that, while not directly responsible for the creation of Lutfur Rahman's new Islamist republic in Tower Hamlets, it is most certainly guilty of the kind of abject dhimmitude which will see other parts of Britain go the same way? (For full gory details, read this piece in the Spectator by Douglas Murray,detailing how he was ostracised by the Conservatives for speaking too honestly about Islam)

Or should one simply 0bserve with weary disgust that for all the Coalition's vaunted "bonfire of the quangos", there still seem to be a hell of a lot left to make our country more sclerotically over-regulated, less business-friendly, less free and more expensive.

I'm thinking, for example, of this bunch of time-wasting, eco-fascist charlatans attached – where else? – to the University of East Anglia. The Living With Environmental Change Directorate, they're called. Did you know they existed? Of course you didn't. Yet if you're involved in science research it's likely that you won't get your application approved without these eco-loons' say-so. Note that its budget for the first five years is £1 billion. You could buy an aircraft to go on an aircraft carrier with that.

And how about the Food Standards Agency, which now seems to have decided that its remit is not merely to police food safety standards, but actually to inflict vegetarianism on us in the name of 'combatting climate change.' (H/T Dropstone)

The report which advised this was – inevitably – produced by "scientists" at the "University" of East Anglia. (Yep, that'll be as in Climategate, for any readers who are slow at the back there). It is almost cherishable in its vagueness, fatuousness and pointlessness. You wonder agog as you read it: were these people actually PAID to produce this drivel?

"Climate change may affect food choice through price and availability," it says.
Well, no ****, Sherlock!

"Increases in food prices are likely to lead to some consumers choosing lower cost food."
Ditto.

"Climate change may lead to initiatives to produce food with lower Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions."

Ah. Now this is the bit where it starts to get sinister. Note that weaselly phrase "may lead to initiatives." And these "initiatives", they're what, things that just happen passively, out of thin air, over which governments have no control?

Apart from being riddled with false assumptions – the main ones, of course, being that "Greenhouse Gases" need to be controlled in the first place; that their effect on "Climate Change" is anything to worry about; that any of this is any business of the Food Standards Agency anybloodyway – the document is really just a means of further advancing the cause of the Quangocracy, Big Government and the UN's Agenda 21.

The FSA National Diet and Nutrition Survey will be essential in highlighting changes in nutritional intake and status resulting from climate change. This may ensure that any problems that arise can be addressed. Extending the survey to better cover vulnerable groups is essential.

Interesting use of the word "essential" there.
Starseed
Guest
#145 | Posted: 22 Oct 2010 17:35 | Edited by: Starseed
Reply 
Fury over £1bn green stealth tax in spending review
Businesses have condemned an "appalling" £1bn a year green stealth tax that will add 11pc to the energy bills of British companies.


About 5,000 large and medium-sized companies with bills of more than £500,000 per year will be hit by the new tax.

George Osborne, the Chancellor, did not mention the levy in his spending cuts speech. But the details were buried in Treasury documents setting out how money will be raised to pay down the deficit.

Starting in April 2012, the Treasury plans to collect money from all businesses forced to enter its Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC) scheme.

The green measure was due to be introduced in April 2011 to force companies to buy "allowances" at £12 for every tonne of carbon dioxide they emit.

Previously, the best performing businesses would have received rebates if they reduced emissions, while poor performers would pay in full. The scheme will now simply penalise companies according to the amount of carbon dioxide they produce.

Charles Hendry, the Energy Minister, told The Daily Telegraph. "Part of what we're trying to do is respond to concerns that the scheme is too complicated. We're reducing the complexity." He declined to comment on the extra costs now facing companies.
Businesses were furious that the Treasury appeared to hide the tax change in the small print of the Spending Review announcement.

Stephen Robertson, director-general of the British Retail Consortium, said: "We are surprised and dismayed that the £1bn per year participating businesses will put in to the Carbon Reduction Commitment scheme is no longer to be recycled to participants but is instead to be pocketed by the Exchequer.

"A tax of this size surely merits a mention in the Chancellor's speech. It is appalling that the Government is sneaking this in, introducing a new burden on businesses that are trying to create new jobs to offset the public sector cutbacks and growing the economy to generate the tax base to pay down the debt."

Analysts from PriceWaterhouseCooper said the changes will cost an extra of £76,000 per year in the first year, rising to £114,000 per year by 2015, for a business with an average £1m gas and electricity bill.

Steve Radley, director of policy at the EEF, the manufacturing industry group, said: "If the private sector is going to play a greater role in increasing investment and driving growth it needs clarity and stability. By changing the rules six months after the game has started and landing business with an unsignalled £1bn tax rise the government has sent an unwelcome signal to business."

Climate change minister Greg Barker said: "This hasn't been done lightly but against the background of the unprecedented deficit, we've had to allocate proceeds of the CRC to support public finances, including the environment. The CRC will continue to drive improvements in energy efficiency in the UK. I now want to hear from business how we can simplify and improve the scheme."

Energy consultants said uncertainties surrounded the scheme because the Government has not ironed out some details of the tax.

Ben Wielgus, a risk advisor at accountants KPMG, said it would increase work for businesses already struggling with a complicated scheme. "All 5,000 companies will now have to go back and revisit what their costs and cashflow are going to look like," he said.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/8076822/Fury-over-1bn-green-st ealth-tax-in-spending-review.html
dreamkatcher
Member
#146 | Posted: 23 Oct 2010 11:19
Reply 
Sleeping Policemen wake up to global warming
permalinke-mail story to a friendprint version

Published 16 February, 2009, 10:16

Edited 15 January, 2010, 18:59

They are the bane of Britain's motorists, but after an environmentally- friendlier makeover, speed bumps look set to be the latest asset in the rush for renewables.
Share5 Yahoo StumbleUpon Google Technorati
del.icio.us Digg Reddit Mixx Propeller

Since they were first placed on British roads in 1981, "sleeping policemen" have been widely resented for damaging cars, wasting fuel and slowing motorists down. Now, these irritating hindrances look set to take on a new and albeit more constructive role, as part of the government's attempt to "green up" the transport sector and create an environmentally-friendlier Great Britain.

The state-of-the-art speed bumps, or "sleeping policemen" as they have become better known, will capture the kinetic energy of vehicles traveling over them and power road signs, traffic lights and street lights. The pilot scheme is initially to start in London but is planned to be inaugurated nationally.

Conventional speed bumps each cost approximately 2,000 pounds and with an estimated 30,000 in place in London alone they inevitably intensify the infuriation of already wound up drivers in the capital. An 'electro-kinetic road bump' costs between £20,000 and £50,000, but is capable of producing between £5,840 pounds and £21,024 worth of energy a year.

The innovative system works by a series of panels installed in a ramp in the road that trigger a cog with each passing car, which then turns a motor and produces energy. The energy is then used to power road related equipment and any surplus power is fed into the national grid.

Peter Hughes, the designer of the system, believes the speed bumps are advantageous over more integrated and costly forms of renewable energy, as they generate power free of charge and that 10 of the speed bumps could generate the same amount of electricity as one wind turbine. According to Hughes,

"With a steady flow of traffic, four of the ramps used as speed bumps would be enough to power all the street lights, traffic lights and road signs for a mile-long stretch of street. The ramp is silent, comfortable and safe for vehicles. It is not only green energy; it is free energy, once you have paid for the capital cost of the equipment. The full potential of this is absolutely enormous."

Perhaps the most exciting component of this new source of green energy is the positive feedback it has received from many disgruntled drivers. 43-year-old Mary Jacobs, who regularly drives an Alfa Romeo Spider in London, is one motorist who is particularly indignant of "sleeping policemen". Ms Jacobs commented,

"Because my car is fairly low bearing, speed bumps have literally cost me thousands in damages, although if I knew they were helping the environment I may be inclined to be more patient towards them. Having said that I do hope they make the new sleeping policemen slightly lower."

Councils in London are also believed to be excited by the prospect and Hughes has been collaborating with over 200 councils who are interested in implementing the system on their local roads either this year or next.

Like the nightclub recently opened in London that converts the kinetic energy of dancers on the dance floor, electro-kinetic road bumps also harness valuable energy that has previously just been wasted. Britain's sleeping policemen may have finally woken up and prove to be invaluable in the rush to save the planet.

Gabrielle Pickard for RT


http://rt.com/Top_News/2009-02-16/Sleeping_Policemen_wake_up_to_global_warming.html
Starseed
Guest
#147 | Posted: 23 Oct 2010 15:16
Reply 


In late September 2010, five "scientists" wrote a turgid and prolix response to four straightforward pages of written scientific and economic testimony that I had submitted in May 2010 to the Congress of the United States, and had presented at an oral hearing, at the request of the ranking minority member of the House Global warming Committee.

The purely political character of what was superficially dressed up as a "scientific" response to my testimony may be gauged from the fact that the five spent many months assembling their tedious and scientifically-regrettable document without having contacted either me or the great majority of the scientific authorities I had cited before they circulated their tract to friendly news media and blog sites. This calculated furtiveness does not betoken honesty.

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/political_science.p df
Starseed
Guest
#148 | Posted: 23 Oct 2010 17:42 | Edited by: Starseed
Reply 
Warmists plot secretly to kill off the Medieval Warming Period. Again.

Remember how one of the great ambitions of the Climategate "scientists" was to "contain" the "putative" Medieval Warming Period? Well – guess what – they're STILL at it.

---------------------------------

'If you haven't the time let me summarise his truly scary conclusion: that by 2050 our planet might possibly have warmed by....

Eight tenths of a degree!'


How will our grandchildren cope?

----------------------------------

At last! Somebody (other than Booker and Delingpole) in the mainstream media has finally woken up to the fact that the government is inflicting one of the biggest bills in history on us; (£18 Bn a year for forty years) for 44,000 25% efficient wind turbines .......... at a time when the country is over its head in debt and people are about to lose jobs left, right and centre.

---------------------------------

The Rest: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100060493/warmists-plot-secretly-to -kill-off-the-medieval-warming-period-again/
dreamkatcher
Member
#149 | Posted: 23 Oct 2010 19:44
Reply 
dreamkatcher:
Starseed:
Ha Ha! Who is Rosalind Peterson??? Who cares what she says? Does she have any FACTS at hand?

QUOTE: "What a great video. Every time Rosalind Peterson opens her mouth, she proves her ignorance. And so many people follow everything she says. It's disgusting!"


"I have to tell ya, I just can't watch it past where she starts babbling. It's painful to hear this influential woman get it all so wrong!"

Oh, yes, she`s a good one alright - Belly laugh... She gets her arse handed to her here.

******************************************************************

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/you/article-1296796/James-Delingpoles-talks-struggle- depression.html




Why dont you answer my quote starseed? You slag Rosalind off, but quote everything as true from someone who suffers, on his own admission, with manic depression.

I admire his honesty, but if you know anything about manic depression (now called Bi-Polar) its an illness which causes very deep depressions/suicidal thoughts, then very high moods.
Who is to know WHICH mood he is in when he composes articles? He tells how his father & grandfather suffered too & "how he sometimes makes the same noises."

Have you read this link? PROOF.
Starseed
Guest
#150 | Posted: 23 Oct 2010 20:46
Reply 
Warmists plot secretly to kill off the Medieval Warming Period. Again.

Remember how one of the great ambitions of the Climategate "scientists" was to "contain" the "putative" Medieval Warming Period? Well – guess what – they're STILL at it.

---------------------------------

'If you haven't the time let me summarise his truly scary conclusion: that by 2050 our planet might possibly have warmed by....

Eight tenths of a degree!'

How will our grandchildren cope?

----------------------------------

At last! Somebody (other than Booker and Delingpole) in the mainstream media has finally woken up to the fact that the government is inflicting one of the biggest bills in history on us; (£18 Bn a year for forty years) for 44,000 25% efficient wind turbines .......... at a time when the country is over its head in debt and people are about to lose jobs left, right and centre.

---------------------------------

The Rest: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100060493/warmists-plot-secretly-to -kill-off-the-medieval-warming-period-again/
 Page:  ««  1  2  ...  8  9  10  11  12  ...  97  98  »» 
Your reply
Bold Style  Italic Style  Image Link  URL Link 

   
» Username  » Password 
Only registered users are allowed to post here. Please enter your login/password details upon posting a message, or sign up first
TO JOIN THIS FORUM: WE ARE NOT ADMITTING NEW MEMBERS AT THIS POINT IN TIME. THIS IS DUE TO PREVIOUS TROLLS ATTACKING THE FORUM.
We may be considering adding new members on a "block basis". We will collect new member requests and then introduce a new batch. The new memebrs will be identifiable by a prefix in their username as a "new member". Anyone considered to be trolling or causing trouble will be immedialtey removed. To be put on the list please email richard@richplanet.net AND GIVE YOUR US NAME, A USERNAME, PASSWORD. I would imagine a new batch of new members will be added in January 2012.
 

Forums are powered by miniBB®