h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I don't know. The overwhelming offensiveness of some of the 'religious' posters on this site caused me to leave for nine months. Is it worth engaging in discussion? I don't know.

Hello Gilgamos,

I have been asked by a concerned Researcher, to drop in and give you some support/advice.

I can fully understand your consternation regarding the behaviour of certain posters in the 'religious' threads. To be honest, a lot of them have been posting together for a number of years and it really becomes a 'round robin' between all concerned.

My advice would be to do what most of us do... Just unsubscribe and let them get on with it. There are plenty of other affable threads you can join, which will hopefully help you settle into Hootoo once again.

Regards,

lil x

thanks lil. I'll see what I can do.

Good!


Shout here if you want to rant about anything


lil x

Hi Caracatus.

Warner can be a pain, an irritant, a pathological miscreant, that's true.

And while his obstinacy is legendary, his ignorance profound

His willingness to trust in nought but faith, sends us round and round

He's slippier than a very slippy, thing coated in grease: the greasiest in the zoo.


(That started off as a sensble post, but then I thought I could make it rhyme!)


I sought you ought after the latest exchange in Miscellaneous Chat, because this time I think I've got him. short of changing the subject (which he is wont to do time and again) or ignoring my questions (ditto) I think I'm winning the intellectual argument - of course time (heh!) will tell.

Basically if he has irked and annoyed you - don't panic - he has that effect on everyone.

Back to the front I go, under heavy bombardment from the other side - I wonder if truth will out, this time?

we shall see.


Perhaps.

Well he just accepted a date of 900,000 years, which though he's still fidgety about how the data is acquired and what it all means and so on and so on, he hasn't objected to the actual numbers.

Success!

reservations have been expressed, however.

True, but it's more than I'd hoped to get, if later on he wants to turn around and shout loudly no no no god did it - the Koran is the holy revealed word of god and nothing can fault it's writings, I'll not believe such worldly lies yada yada yada - that's his prerogative.

My limited ambition is to take him as far as I can and if that's with reservations then so be it.

Warner's brain is addled by faith, I seriously doubt any rational argument or evidence will ever persuade him, but this might just instil that seed of doubt, of critical thinking of questioning that in the long run may serve a better purpose.

My goal is to challenge Warner's insistence that dating methods cannot be proven or trusted or given any credence because (and I quote) 'time is relative'.

To have gotten up to 900,000 with him squirming and leaving some wiggle room, is in my experience, tantamount to scaling the North face of The Eiger in roller skates.

Just a heads up, Clive:


there is debate about whether climate change will lead to a warm Britain or a cold Britain.

If the North Atlantic conveyor is not shut down by the melting of the Greenland Ice Sheet, and so, the Gulf Stream continues to flow, then Britain will continue to enjoy the anomolously warm climate it has had for millenia, but it will be warmer.

If, on the other hand, the Greenland icesheet goes quickly enough to shut down the Conveyor and the Gulf Stream, Britain will experience a climate more appropriate to its latitude: think Newfoundland and Labrador. Compare Glasgow weather, which I see will give temperatures on Saturday of around 20 C, to St. Johns, which might make it to 17 if the sun shines all night. And then there are the winters. . .

Ah yes, I'm aware of that one.

That's why 'global warming' is a bit of a misnomer, and 'climate change' is preferable (and non committal) the globe may warm but locally temperature may drop.

I like to reflect that the Midlands of England where I live is on the same Parallel as Goose Bay in Northern Canada.

Were it not for our wonderful North Atlantic Conveyer we'd be a nation of igloos and polar bears.

I note also Warner made the fallacious statement of maybe it'll warm maybe it'll freeze
>>First I hear of increasing temperatures, then decreasing <<

I think that's a reference to the impendng threat of 'the new ice age'
(ignoring the fact that by having ice at the poles were already in an ice age)

There's a very good youtube video that debunks this, I'll see if I can find it...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52KLGqDSAjo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoSVoxwYrKI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EU_AtHkB4Ms

Enjoy!

I'll have to leave the videos for later, but I have to mention:

'Goose Bay in Northern Canada' Considering how much of Canada is north of Goose Bay, Goose Bay is at the mid-latitudes of Canada.

I accept the correction, I was working by memory.

No, I'm being silly. Goose Bay is generally considered to be in the North, despite geographical reality. Just like Toronto, Montreal and Quebec City are considered to be in Central Canada, and Winnipeg, which really is pretty close to the East-West middle, is reckoned to be in the West.

Let me know what you think of those climate videos.

Oh. I forgot.

Okay, I've watched the first one and I'm hooked.

Before I watch the rest, which may not be this evening, I want to mention my rule of thumb for assessing scientific claims that I'm to lazy to investigate in detail: If the claim is something that I would like to be true, I'm skeptical.

Disasterous man-made climate change, despite my deep-seated misanthropy, is not something that I would really like to happen. And so, because I don't want it to be true, I am predisposed to accept the evidence that we've screwed ourselves royally.

Okay, I've finished them. It's a nice precis of the evidence. My mind's not been changed.