Rock Paper Scissors

[Wolfie]

5 hours ago, The Beast said:

Well, if David Attenborough offered any form of challenge to the scientific community he would be ridiculed. All his years of work would be forgotten. A sour way to end his career in its Autumn.  Beardy Bellamy questioned the science and was marginalised. Scientists are paid to study global warming. No global warming means no jobs for the boys. 

If we do not radically change our habits within 14 years it will be too late...... the World is going to end or all humans will be brown bread. Spectrum dwelling Greta says so. No mention of mass consumerism or neutering the handful of corporations that hold us to ransom, whilst being responsible for knocking out goods and products that cause most of the pollution. Taking 200 years of data out of 4 billion years of the planet's existence to paint an Armageddon scenario. Absolutely fucking bonkers. 

Thankfully I'd say he's in the winter of his career. I couldn't care less about the lying old scrotum's legacy. Bellamy questioned the authorities and was vilified for it, while cantankerous old bullshitter Attenborough was flying high from reading BBC climate agenda scripts while racking up millions of air miles.

The fucking BBC should be begging us to forgive them for being stupid enough to put out fake information about climate change, believing we're all gullible enough to fall for Attenborough's soothing, educated, caring voice at the helm with a heart-wrenching stereotypical BBC piano in the background. The hypocritical old cuntflap should have retired years ago.

[Mrs Roops]

17 hours ago, The Beast said:

Well, if David Attenborough offered any form of challenge to the scientific community he would be ridiculed. All his years of work would be forgotten. A sour way to end his career in its Autumn.  Beardy Bellamy questioned the science and was marginalised. Scientists are paid to study global warming. No global warming means no jobs for the boys. 

If we do not radically change our habits within 14 years it will be too late...... the World is going to end or all humans will be brown bread. Spectrum dwelling Greta says so. No mention of mass consumerism or neutering the handful of corporations that hold us to ransom, whilst being responsible for knocking out goods and products that cause most of the pollution. Taking 200 years of data out of 4 billion years of the planet's existence to paint an Armageddon scenario. Absolutely fucking bonkers. 

12 hours ago, Wolfie said:

Thankfully I'd say he's in the winter of his career. I couldn't care less about the lying old scrotum's legacy. Bellamy questioned the authorities and was vilified for it, while cantankerous old bullshitter Attenborough was flying high from reading BBC climate agenda scripts while racking up millions of air miles.

The fucking BBC should be begging us to forgive them for being stupid enough to put out fake information about climate change, believing we're all gullible enough to fall for Attenborough's soothing, educated, caring voice at the helm with a heart-wrenching stereotypical BBC piano in the background. The hypocritical old cuntflap should have retired years ago.

Scientists are paid to do a lot if things, many are paid by corporates and lobbyists to downplay the environmental effects of their client's commercial activities.

Whilst Its certain that the world will not end in fourteen years, correcting behaviour that damages the planet will become more problematic as time goes on. 250 years ago the world's population was roughly 700 million people. 200 years later that figure was 3 billion, fifty years later in 2011 that figure had more than doubled to 7 billion. Even with a slow down in population growth (markedly in the western nations) that figure is expected to hit 10 billion by 2083. By any standard that is not sustainable without decisive remedies.

One of the problems of large populations with access to mass communications is that soundbites rule and details are brushed aside. Debate concentrates on headlines and if the headlines question an orthodoxy then the messenger is shot down and not much questions are asked later. All to often, individuals who make a careless or unguarded statement are forced to consider their positions.

One such person was David Bellamy who made his reputation as an excellent communicator on environmentalism. He was one of the scientists who first raised concerns about global warning. Bellamy's mistake and misfortune was to endorse a study by then renowned physicist and climatologist Fred Singer who himself quoted from a study of 200+ glaciers that showed that the glaciers were advancing and not retreating. It later transpired that the study, allegedly published and peer-reviewed in the Science Journal, did not exist. Bellamy did eventually retract but by then it was too late. One poor oversight on his part and a legacy tarnished forever. As for Fred Singer, well he has form for arguing against the scientific consensus. He argued that there was no evidence that CFC's was damaging the ozone layer and that passive smoking was not connected to cancer. He has since downplayed his stance on global warming describing himself as a climate change sceptic rather than as a climate change denier.

[Guest N/A]

On 28/01/2020 at 01:15, Mrs Roops said:

I'm sorry, but your repeated position was that ozone "eats" methane, now that you realise your assertion was a pile of cack you're quietly deflecting. I've previously concurred that there has been natural climate changes in the past, the difference this time is the unprecedented rate of change due to man indelibly making his mark on the ecosystem from 250 years ago and onwards. Why not actually read the previous posts. Temperatures up to 800,000 years ago can be determined by difference in ice cap strata thickness extrapolated from ice core samples. The properties of low and high altitude were determined in the 1920's. Ozone or trioxygen (O₃) as it is correctly known was discovered in the late nineteenth century.

Fuck off Roops.....I stated quiet clearly that methane eats ozone.  You fucking retard.

[King Billy]

1 minute ago, Monumental cunt said:

Fuck off Roops.....I stated quiet clearly that methane eats ozone.  You fucking retard.

100% correct. Methane can eat its way through anything and I’ve got a hole in the back of my underpants to prove it.

[Guest N/A]

11 hours ago, Mrs Roops said:

Scientists are paid to do a lot if things, many are paid by corporates and lobbyists to downplay the environmental effects of their client's commercial activities.

Whilst Its certain that the world will not end in fourteen years, correcting behaviour that damages the planet will become more problematic as time goes on. 250 years ago the world's population was roughly 700 million people. 200 years later that figure was 3 billion, fifty years later in 2011 that figure had more than doubled to 7 billion. Even with a slow down in population growth (markedly in the western nations) that figure is expected to hit 10 billion by 2083. By any standard that is not sustainable without decisive remedies.

One of the problems of large populations with access to mass communications is that soundbites rule and details are brushed aside. Debate concentrates on headlines and if the headlines question an orthodoxy then the messenger is shot down and not much questions are asked later. All to often, individuals who make a careless or unguarded statement are forced to consider their positions.

One such person was David Bellamy who made his reputation as an excellent communicator on environmentalism. He was one of the scientists who first raised concerns about global warning. Bellamy's mistake and misfortune was to endorse a study by then renowned physicist and climatologist Fred Singer who himself quoted from a study of 200+ glaciers that showed that the glaciers were advancing and not retreating. It later transpired that the study, allegedly published and peer-reviewed in the Science Journal, did not exist. Bellamy did eventually retract but by then it was too late. One poor oversight on his part and a legacy tarnished forever. As for Fred Singer, well he has form for arguing against the scientific consensus. He argued that there was no evidence that CFC's was damaging the ozone layer and that passive smoking was not connected to cancer. He has since downplayed his stance on global warming describing himself as a climate change sceptic rather than as a climate change denier.

Roops.....everyone needs to downplay their position on climate change as there is NO conclusive evidence one way or the other that what man does...and some women....affects the worlds weather greatly or at all.     The Sun is by far the biggest factor in any weather patterns and all accept that.   Weather a few cows farting or some cars sat in traffic threaten life on earth is dubious.   Plants like CO2. in fact without CO2 we are ironically all dead.  To reduce it would be a mistake.

[Guest N/A]

6 minutes ago, King Billy said:

100% correct. Methane can eat its way through anything and I’ve got a hole in the back of my underpants to prove it.

That’s unmistakeable evidence..... well fielded Sir.

[Eric Cuntman]

40 minutes ago, Monumental cunt said:

Fuck off Roops.....I stated quiet clearly that methane eats ozone.  You fucking retard.

Master-Blaster run Bartertown!

[Mrs Roops]

 

10 hours ago, Monumental cunt said:

Fuck off Roops.....I stated quiet clearly that methane eats ozone.  You fucking retard.

Neither "eats" each other, it was clearly stated that methane, far from "eating" ozone provides the building blocks of ozone. 🙄

 

[Mrs Roops]

10 hours ago, Monumental cunt said:

Weather a few cows farting or some cars sat in traffic threaten life on earth is dubious.  

...and smog has life-enhancing properties, who knew?

[Stubby Pecker]

21 hours ago, Mrs Roops said:

Scientists are paid to do a lot if things, many are paid by corporates and lobbyists to downplay the environmental effects of their client's commercial activities.

Whilst Its certain that the world will not end in fourteen years, correcting behaviour that damages the planet will become more problematic as time goes on. 250 years ago the world's population was roughly 700 million people. 200 years later that figure was 3 billion, fifty years later in 2011 that figure had more than doubled to 7 billion. Even with a slow down in population growth (markedly in the western nations) that figure is expected to hit 10 billion by 2083. By any standard that is not sustainable without decisive remedies.

One of the problems of large populations with access to mass communications is that soundbites rule and details are brushed aside. Debate concentrates on headlines and if the headlines question an orthodoxy then the messenger is shot down and not much questions are asked later. All to often, individuals who make a careless or unguarded statement are forced to consider their positions.

One such person was David Bellamy who made his reputation as an excellent communicator on environmentalism. He was one of the scientists who first raised concerns about global warning. Bellamy's mistake and misfortune was to endorse a study by then renowned physicist and climatologist Fred Singer who himself quoted from a study of 200+ glaciers that showed that the glaciers were advancing and not retreating. It later transpired that the study, allegedly published and peer-reviewed in the Science Journal, did not exist. Bellamy did eventually retract but by then it was too late. One poor oversight on his part and a legacy tarnished forever. As for Fred Singer, well he has form for arguing against the scientific consensus. He argued that there was no evidence that CFC's was damaging the ozone layer and that passive smoking was not connected to cancer. He has since downplayed his stance on global warming describing himself as a climate change sceptic rather than as a climate change denier.

Christ roops, if you and I had a conversation we could bore the paint off the walls.

Every sensible person knows the human population as it stands is destroying planet earth in many more ways than just climate change- pollution of the seas, mass industrialised chemical farming, reducing the planets ability of absorb CO2 and produce O2 etc etc, however, there are very few sensible folk out there willing to stick their heads over the battlements and suggest real ways that we should implement right now to reduce our numbers. Euthanasia of the over 75s and compulsory sterilisation after two kids would do the trick but there might be problems selling this idea to the electorate. 

IMO the only ways we can get out of this mess is if a virus comes along and wipes out most of humanity and those left decide to do things better (and make all the nuclear power plants and missiles safe) 

 

[Stubby Pecker]

2 minutes ago, Mrs Roops said:

...and smog has life-enhancing properties, who knew?

I wonder what the whether is like in the Cotswolds this morning? I couldn't see Painswick beacon, Crickley hill or Selsley common when I left for work due to the fog

And the cows breath out the methane not fart it.

[Mrs Roops]

25 minutes ago, Stubby Pecker said:

Christ roops, if you and I had a conversation we could bore the paint off the walls.

Every sensible person knows the human population as it stands is destroying planet earth in many more ways than just climate change- pollution of the seas, mass industrialised chemical farming, reducing the planets ability of absorb CO2 and produce O2 etc etc, however, there are very few sensible folk out there willing to stick their heads over the battlements and suggest real ways that we should implement right now to reduce our numbers. Euthanasia of the over 75s and compulsory sterilisation after two kids would do the trick but there might be problems selling this idea to the electorate. 

IMO the only ways we can get out of this mess is if a virus comes along and wipes out most of humanity and those left decide to do things better (and make all the nuclear power plants and missiles safe) 

 

I did previously hint on this when I mentioned "decisive remedies".

Here's a thought; did the Africans and indigenous Indians of the Americas have the right idea? They restricted themselves to hunter-gathering and a small bit of subsistence farming. They took from the land only enough to survive. Populations remained comparatively constant. It all went to shit when tribes started to barter with each other.

[King Billy]

3 minutes ago, Mrs Roops said:

I did previously hint on this when I mentioned "decisive remedies".

Here's a thought; did the Africans and indigenous Indians of the Americas have the right idea? They restricted themselves to hunter-gathering and a small bit of subsistence farming. They took from the land only enough to survive. Populations remained comparatively constant. It all went to shit when tribes stated to barter with each other.

Yeah and you could go out all day and leave your back door unlocked. 

Ronnie and Reggie were identical cunts.

[Mrs Roops]

5 minutes ago, King Billy said:

Yeah and you could go out all day and leave your back door unlocked. 

Ronnie and Reggie were identical cunts.

You're so parochial.

[King Billy]

1 minute ago, Mrs Roops said:

You're so parochial.

Why thank you. I’ve always tried to avoid having any broad minded opinions. Keeping it narrow, that’s me.

[Stubby Pecker]

7 minutes ago, Mrs Roops said:

I did previously hint on this when I mentioned "decisive remedies".

Here's a thought; did the Africans and indigenous Indians of the Americas have the right idea? They restricted themselves to hunter-gathering and a small bit of subsistence farming. They took from the land only enough to survive. Populations remained comparatively constant. It all went to shit when tribes stated to barter with each other.

That's of course our traditional and ingrained notion of the "noble savage" living at one with nature, whereas the truth is somewhat different. 

In Africa humans evolved alongside other species so both developed ways to cope with each other- possibly why its the only place left with a mega fauna so to speak of.

When humans got to the Americas there was a guild of species which would put the Serengeti in the shade- mammoths, camels, horses, ground sloths and predators incredibly diverse. Within a few 1000 years these were virtually all gone due to over hunting, changing the environment and more than likely disruption the complex relationships between wildlife, vegetation, water, soils etc that had developed over millennia. The same happened in Australia- a monitor lizard the size of a van, a marsupial sabre tooth, a kangaroo that could look through a first story window....

Wherever hunter gather populations still cling on, the area is virtually devoid of wildlife. It's the Easter Island paradigm without boarders 

[camberwell gypsy]

I'm in bed with my 11 month old grandson and just got him off to sleep. Then, bang on 11, the cunt three doors up decides to let off a shitload of fireworks to celebrate Brexit. This wakes the baby up and now I cant get him back to sleep. 

Does anybody know where I can purchase a huge fuck off rocket? As tomorrow I'm gonna knock on his door, knock him out with a shovel and shove it up his arse.

[Roadkill]

5 minutes ago, camberwell gypsy said:

I'm in bed with my 11 month old grandson and just got him off to sleep. Then, bang on 11, the cunt three doors up decides to let off a shitload of fireworks to celebrate Brexit. This wakes the baby up and now I cant get him back to sleep. 

Does anybody know where I can purchase a huge fuck off rocket? As tomorrow I'm gonna knock on his door, knock him out with a shovel and shove it up his arse.

Good heavens! 

[Earl of Punkape]

12 minutes ago, camberwell gypsy said:

I'm in bed with my 11 month old grandson and just got him off to sleep. Then, bang on 11, the cunt three doors up decides to let off a shitload of fireworks to celebrate Brexit. This wakes the baby up and now I cant get him back to sleep. 

Does anybody know where I can purchase a huge fuck off rocket? As tomorrow I'm gonna knock on his door, knock him out with a shovel and shove it up his arse.

A real lady....

[Eric Cuntman]

55 minutes ago, Earl of Punkape said:

A real lady....

Scary Poppins.

[Guest N/A]

On 30/01/2020 at 10:25, Mrs Roops said:

 

Neither "eats" each other, it was clearly stated that methane, far from "eating" ozone provides the building blocks of ozone. 🙄

 

I think you find it deteriorates ozone.....methane.

[Mrs Roops]

10 hours ago, Monumental cunt said:

I think you find it deteriorates ozone.....methane.

It would be interesting to see the source of your fake science - got any links to back up your assertions?

[camberwell gypsy]

12 hours ago, Monumental cunt said:

I think you find it deteriorates ozone.....methane.

Methane slows down the ozone recovery from chlorofluorocarbons 

[Guest N/A]

On 17/02/2020 at 10:53, Mrs Roops said:

It would be interesting to see the source of your fake science - got any links to back up your assertions?

See above.  The Gypsy pikey knows all about methane.  She’s stolen enough canisters to fuel her caravan