weldoninhio wrote: » It isn't. It will eventually cease to exist. Next question please.
ToBeFrank123 wrote: » FFS...I think you need to grow up.
BarryD2 wrote: » Where did you pull that out of? If you took one square kilometre of sea and raised it 7 metres, you'd have an extra 7 million cubic metres of water. Since the oceans are joined and cover some 362 million square kms of the earths surface, you're telling us that all the ice of Greenland equates to 2.5 x 10 to the power of 15 cubic metres. Somehow or other I doubt you..
KyussB wrote: » Dominating the thread? You're up there as being one of, if not the, most frequent poster on the thread.
easypazz wrote: » National Geographic.The Greenland ice sheet is 10,000 feet thick in places and contains enough ice to raise sea levels 23 feet (7 meters). Are you still doubting me?
Tell me how wrote: » Do you think there is any point having Dr's, hospitals, medication, given that, ultimately, people are going to die anyway?
dont bother wrote: » ...i dont believe she is 16. i believe she is an adult made out to be a child. she has marionette lines ffs. women only get those in their 40s...
easypazz wrote: » If we are serious about climate change we should limit hospital admissions to under 65's only. Need to kill the older generation off faster. Abolishing the fuel allowance would help on the double. Less emissions from them burning coal and they die quicker freeing up housing stock.
KyussB wrote: » Let me just drop this here again - in reference to Greta:
dont bother wrote: » why is so hard to think outside your tiny minded box? why cant you comprehend that there is other things going on behind the scenes. i just cant believe you people so quick to follow the narrative that's thrown at you. you need to cop on. she is certainly not a child, that's for sure. why do you feel the need to resurrect a post from days ago? are you losing the argument?
KyussB wrote: » I just think it's informative to other posters, to know the level of argument they are responding to, from yourself.
dont bother wrote: » why do you feel the need to resurrect a post from days ago? are you losing the argument?
mgn wrote: » Meanwhile Leo,Harris and Murphy going around giving one another high 5's, nice distraction for them, all the media Greta worshiping and nobody talking about the state of the health service or the state of the housing crisis, and Pascal rubbing his hands thinking these fools won't mind carbon taxes now in fact their asking for them now.
Tell me how wrote: » That post was from yesterday. From you. Are you saying we should discount what you said then? I'm getting a head start on tomorrow's work by discounting everything which you are saying today if it's any solace.
Topgear on Dave wrote: » Are you simultaneously complaining about the government not spending enough money (housing & health) whilst also complaining about the government raising taxes. (carbon taxes).
randd1 wrote: » You'd swear the way some people go on that the "The Day After Tomorrow" could pass for a current documentary.Our bones will be well rotted in the ground before any impact we have on climate change has any devastating effect on mankind, and even then most of that will be just nature on its own doing what nature does; not give a fvck about us and carry on changing the climate regardless. The climate will continue to fluctuate as it always has between hot and cool periods, and the planet will be fine. And being the adaptive species we are, we'll adapt and survive, maybe not in great numbers, but we'll survive. It's the fvcking over of the eco-system that will hurt us most, the dirty water, dirty soil, polluted seas, all these will do greater damage to mankind than the ever changing climate that for the almost entire part, we'll have no control over anyway. Never mind the climate that slowly changes, it's the eco-system that needs the help.
ToBeFrank123 wrote: » I wonder how you'd feel if our ancestors took a similar attitude to say nuclear testing and didn't bother ending nuclear testing. They could have taken the attitude, ah shur, we'll all be dead and buried by the time it becomes an issue, so not my problem. We are all only caretakers of the planet and only a psychopath would hand over the planet in a worse state and not care about it.
dont bother wrote: » no i still believe that she is an imposter, an actress paid to play the role of a 16 year old girl with a mental condition to pull on the heartstrings of the weak-minded and to allow a platform for the climate cult so that they wouldnt be argued with as ferociously.
dont bother wrote: » this is exactly what they want. that's the idea of these "smokescreen" media stories. there's something AWFUL happening in the meantime, and we will only know about what it is when this spectacle dies down. it's classic evil government procedures really.
weldoninhio wrote: » Yes there is, live the life you have and enjoy it to the greatest extent you can. Don't worry about things that might never happen. Enjoy your steak, have one more beer, have a lie in if you want or get up and go mountain climbing.
Tell me how wrote: » So then why shouldn't we try to ensure future generations can live with minimum worry about something which we are affecting. It seems very selfish to just say, it won't bother me, so let's do nothing.
Overheal wrote: » Grade A hallucinations.
ToBeFrank123 wrote: » Good luck with that. Clearly you haven't been watching the news the last few months! Importing beef from south America is a really really dumb idea but willingly embraced by EU leaders, which leads me to believe they are all really really dumb.