Britannist

4% is the figure generally quoted by experts as being the amount of carbon emissions which are man-made. Sorry, we have to use the politically correct version - 'person made'. :twisted:

So, if it's true that global warming led to the heatwave in which all those poor folk lost their lives a few years ago in France (as Besoeker suggests might be the case) - then man is responsible for 4% of each death which occurred :shock: .

Lord Lawson, by the way, rightly points out that there has been no global warming in the last seven years in the world and that the average world temperate has increased by less than a degree in the last century.

Besoeker

If you can't trust anyone on GW then you can't conclude if it is real or not. You can't conclude anything about human influence. In short, you would have no basis for expressing any opinion on the matter.
Unless, of course, you are an expert in that field.

From what I have read, nobody is claiming that 2006 XG1 will hit the earth far less destroy all life.

Besoeker

Before I reply further please note that I have not made any correlation between CO2 levels and global warming.

So, your point about 4% of carbon (actually CO2) emissions being mankind made. I thought it was a bit less, but let that pass.

As far as it is known from geological records, the difference between the production and absorption of CO2 from natural sources has been small. Sure, if the difference persists for a huge number of years, the proportion of CO2 in the atmosphere will change considerably over that period.

In the known geological records differences between production and absorption have been about 0.03 ppm per year. Until now. In the last two decades it has been close to 2 ppm.

That's a huge difference. Mankind CO2 production quite closely equates to the observed increases in atmospheric CO2 over the past 20 years.

Conclude from that what you will.

spaman

Let me rephrase that to be closer to what I meant

By alarmists, I mean those that would say it's all our fault, and we need to prostrate ourselves before the tax collector God...

Man's science is still riddled with holes, and that's where the theories start - but they are still that..... they can prove the likelyhood of something nasty like a huge piece of space rock falling on a town, but they can not prove the frequency or actual harm done to humankind by such an act of God...

Despite the fact that films have been very popular on this subject... as well as subjects like superman...all they do is reinforce the theory that they might be possible.... just because something has popular agreement doesn't mean it is real...

Besoeker

Another truly intelligent and well researched response.
Congratulations.

TheVoiceOfReason

I remember when Moscow had a cold winter that a load of ******-up tramps on the street froze to death. So presumably you should subtract those deaths from the Paris ones - after all, if the world warmed up a bit, it might have saved some lives, so you need to come up with a death-neutral figure.

As to the rock hitting earth - so what? It either does or it doesn't. Randy MP Lembit Opik is always blathering on about such things (when he isn't seducing East European refugees). Much better to sort out some of the very real problems here (such as being in the EU) rather than worrying about what might or might not happen if we get hit by a rock in 40 years. A 0.000025% chance of a city somewhere on Earth being destroyed by a big rock in the dim and distant versus a 100% chance of living in a police state, socialist hellhole in the near future. I think I'm rooting for the rock...

Britannist

There's no doubt that Liberal Dim party MPs such as the fool Opik use issues such as asteroids to deflect the attention of voters away from the fact this the party he is in full of stinking europhiles out to sell out the British people to the power-hungry EU and to destroy the ancient Pound Sterling.

Opik is a committed europhile and I am quite sure his voters are quite unaware of the fact.

Since the Conservatives have abandoned attacking the vile Liberal Dim party for being pro-EU and fanatically pro-euro - then it is for UKIP to get the message across the voters in places such as Opik's constituency that he is not on the side of the people of this country.

The Liberal Dims are the political voice of the EU in the UK. Since they have no convincing arguments in support of the EU - they will talk about asteroids or numerous other 'fringe' issues to disguise their only real policy - adoration of the EU.

A couple of weeks ago some Liberal Dim party MP started complaining about how many repeats there were scheduled by television channels over Christmas.

Repeats are not popular. But it is hardly a pressing issue for the nation when the new Presidency of the EU (which starts work today) hopes to revive the half-dead EU Constitution - the aim of which is to strip our Parliament of any remaining sovereign powers.

spaman

Great empty response - say nothing and just attack

Besoeker

OK. Let's try to be constructive about that statement.
Who exactly are the alarmaists who would say it's all our fault?
Have any of them actually said that?

Besoeker

Jean-François Dhainaut
Professor, Emergency and Intensive Care Department, Cochin Port-Royal University Hospital, AP-HP, University Paris 5, France
and others.

Herald Tribune