Prince Charles gives the world 18 months to save humanity from climate change

a reply to: Wide-Eyes

serfs

But most here don't really care to hear what Charles actually was talking about. Because that's no fun.

a reply to: Phage

Seems you beat me by a heartbeat...

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: DBCowboy

Do you know of any study that takes into account the variances of measuring equipment and calibration methods?

All of them, pretty much. You were not aware of this?

Thus the "manipulation" of data which is so often discussed. The variations and instrumental biases are allowed for.

I'm aware of the formulae that is used to support the man-made climate change meme and to justify the variances.

a reply to: Phage

Tight grammar whoring though :-)

a reply to: DBCowboy

I'm aware of the formulae

I find this surprising, since you asked if it is done.
Can you briefly describe them? Not that I doubt that you've studied it, I just wonder about your level of understanding.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: DBCowboy

If it was just something government could actually "do", then they'd "do it".

Right. Oh wait, there's those energy company lobbyists and stuff.

Well,Canada's government has signed onto all this and energy investment has fled to the US We have passed bills to impair our own energy growth and of course hurt our own economy, especially Albertas. But the righteous insist there was no market for our product. In reality the demand is growing in the world

CN rail just went on strike and the first province shrieking an emergency was Quebec who is running out of propane. Quebec recently bragged of being a "Green State" and would not help the "Oil State" of Alberta. Our country is fracturing.

Ontario went heavy into green around 2009. They manged to increase the price of electricity to about 4X what it was and saw a mass exodus of manufactoring and energy poverty for many. There is no reliable replacement for fossil fuels but we will be forced to live some third world Orwellian future dictated by the UN with their Agenda who also control the IPCC

a reply to: fernalley

The UN doesn't really have much in the way of enforcement of climate policy but it does make a good boogeyman for some.

The point is multilateral discussion. An attempt to get the members on the same page. Hell, even Putin is on board now.
www.bloomberg.com...

a reply to: Phage

Regardless of any scientific conjecture. It all boils down to two words.

Carbon Taxes.

We're all carbon based life forms,, therefore we're all a danger to the planet.

Shrivel up and die useless air breather.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: DBCowboy

I'm aware of the formulae

I find this surprising, since you asked if it is done.
Can you briefly describe them? Not that I doubt that you've studied it, I just wonder about your level of understanding.

As an engineer, I've looked into the answer I was asking long before I asked you about it.

I don't jump blindly into things.

a reply to: DBCowboy

As an engineer, I've looked into the answer I was asking long before I asked you about it.

Then why did you ask?

And no brief description forthcoming?

a reply to: ArMaP

well, why was it a big headline today then on BING homepage:

www.bing.com

And heres more lniks from BING today:

www.dailytelegraph.com.au...

www.theaustralian.com.au...

a reply to: Wide-Eyes

We're all carbon based life forms,, therefore we're all a danger to the planet.

In this case it has to do with the combustion of carbon which has been buried for millions upon millions of years.

a reply to: CrazeeWorld777

well, why was it a big headline today then on BING homepage:

Good question.
Here's a more contemporaneous article.

Referencing a range of environmental conferences to be held by the United Nations, he added: “The next 18 months will see critical meetings that will collectively determine the global agenda for the coming decade.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: DBCowboy

As an engineer, I've looked into the answer I was asking long before I asked you about it.

Then why did you ask?

An no brief description forthcoming?

I don't feel required as my premise was all about fear-mongering by government to enact legislation that people normally wouldn't be for unless they were scared into it.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: DBCowboy

As an engineer, I've looked into the answer I was asking long before I asked you about it.

Then why did you ask?

An no brief description forthcoming?

And to add, I often ask questions I already have the answers to.

a reply to: DBCowboy

I don't feel required

Okey dokey.

fear-mongering by government to enact legislation that people normally wouldn't be for

You may be right. This particular administration is big on pushing fear when it suits them.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Wide-Eyes

We're all carbon based life forms,, therefore we're all a danger to the planet.

In this case it has to do with the combustion of carbon which has been buried for millions upon millions of years.

Yet when we exhale we produce evil CO2.

However can we avoid that?

a reply to: Phage

Yeah, he did say that aswell but in my op I was just mentioning the fact that he said 'we have 18 months left' which he did say.

a reply to: Wide-Eyes

Yet when we exhale we produce evil CO2.

However can we avoid that?

We can't. But unless you eat coal, that CO2 is not adding to atmospheric CO2 concentrations because that's where it came from in the first place.

a reply to: CrazeeWorld777

Yeah, he did say that aswell but in my op I was just mentioning the fact that he said 'we have 18 months left' which he did say.

Yes. I noticed.
A very selective quote. Well done.