Why does the UK Government listen to scientists about global warming but not about overfishing the North Sea?
956268
Like most politicians,,they have their heads up their butts and cannot see the daylight,,for example,,Tony Blair thinks Cherie is good looking!
391643
it is the opinion of most biologists that the sea contains much more biomass
843194
No, temperatures are going up due to Global Warming.\n\nCO2 is 30% higher than it has been for 650,000 years. Methane is 130% greater. These are two of the main pollutants humans put into the atmosphere in excess, and they are two of the primary greenhouse gases.\n\nLook at the 'hockeystick', which shows a dramatic warming since 1950 after a fairly stable climate for 1000 years. In fact, the 10 hottest years in recorded history have all happened since 1990, with 2005 being the hottest, and 2006 is shaping up to maybe break that record.\n(see links below)\n\nHow's that for proof of man's fault in this? There is ample proof, any real scientist will tell you that.\n\nThere has NEVER been an article doubting man's influence on global warming published in a peer-reviewed journal. A recent study of almost 1000 proved that.\n\nYes, the earth naturally heats and cools, but the rate and amount we are warming now is unprecedented in the recent geologic past. We are doing this, and we must stop it. This is not some political statement or rhetoric. This is science trying to educate a crass, ignorant public of the damage they are doing. The magnitude of temperature increase ALREADY is about 10x that of the 'little ice age' of the middle ages, and rate and amount are only going up. \n\nJust to be clear, glacial and interglacial cycles are mainly controlled by astronomical fluctuations, but we have a detailed record of the last 7 cycles, and what the climate and CO2 is doing now is way different and extreme. The rate of increase is much higher than in the past AND the value itself is much higher.\n\nHI CO2: \nhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4467420.stm\nHOCKEY STICK: \nhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/5109188.stm\nGeneral climate stuff: \nhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3897061.stm
338217
Finally someone has come to their senses.  The problem with "global warming" is that you can't prove or test anything!  Its all in theory.   Check some of these sites and read the Crichton novel "State of Fear".
814336
Global warming is happening, 100%, there is no evidence the other way.  The only poblem with the data is the lack of data, we need more of it, more research.\n\nTell your teacher this:\n\nCO2 is 30% higher than it has been for 650,000 years. Methane is 130% greater. These are two of the main pollutants humans put into the atmosphere in excess, and they are two of the primary greenhouse gases.\n\nLook at the 'hockeystick', which shows a dramatic warming since 1950 after a fairly stable climate for 1000 years. In fact, the 10 hottest years in recorded history have all happened since 1990, with 2005 being the hottest, and 2006 is shaping up to maybe break that record.\n(see links below)\n\nHow's that for proof of man's fault in this? There is ample proof, any real scientist will tell you that.\n\nThere has NEVER been an article doubting man's influence on global warming published in a peer-reviewed journal. A recent study of almost 1000 proved that.\n\nYes, the earth naturally heats and cools, but the rate and amount we are warming now is unprecedented in the recent geologic past. We are doing this, and we must stop it. This is not some political statement or rhetoric. This is science trying to educate a crass, ignorant public of the damage they are doing. The magnitude of temperature increase ALREADY is about 10x that of the 'little ice age' of the middle ages, and rate and amount are only going up. \n\nJust to be clear, glacial and interglacial cycles are mainly controlled by astronomical fluctuations, but we have a detailed record of the last 7 cycles, and what the climate and CO2 is doing now is way different and extreme. The rate of increase is much higher than in the past AND the value itself is much higher.\n\nHI CO2: \nhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4467420.stm\nHOCKEY STICK: \nhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/5109188.stm\nGeneral climate stuff: \nhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3897061.stm
268739
This is pretty much a dead subject since the Bush Administration ignores that there is a Global Warming problem. They wouldn't continue the program.
250317
Ha Ha Ha, of course they have, there is 40 years of scientific research from scientists all over the world. They first softened the language, and started calling Global Warming, Global Climate Change. The Republicans are for business, and capitalism. They want to drill oil in Alaska. We have had record oil profits with hurricane damage in "ONE" year. The New York Times reported that, the oil companies profits they (WHAT THEY TURNED IN) were more than a country the size of America makes in taxes in "ONE" year. There is 10,000 articles on this subject, and yes it is real.
21417
Not very - scientists recommend catch limits to the government.   The government then yields to political pressure and raises catch limits and fish stocks continue to decline.
672515
Its not really important.\n\nThey're saying that someday the earth could heat up enough to melt the north and south poles and burry us all in water.  The sea is currently rising at a rate of like a half inch each year.  However, climet changes all of the time and so the greenhouse effect isn't necessarily a concern.
69114
I pray for true science positions resolving global warming, nothing is more important regarding this planet, it better not take ten years.\n\nBlubla
688110
If you can call a 1 degree change in 100 years significant, go ahead. The truth is nobody knows why or what is causing warming. The earth has heated up and cooled down many times. No matter, its just good policy to take care of the environment we live in without being extremists or gloom and doom profits.
1154868
The governments with the money - US, Great Britain, and China - seem not to care that much. The US has been taken over by multinationals whose bottom line is money. Protecting the environment seems not to be profitable. The mulitnationals have bought the government and thus have gutted all the protection earlier governments have put in place. Yes, the planet has significant problems. \n\nGlobal warming is real. Read Kim Stanley Robinson's books _40 Signs of Rain_ and _50 Degrees Below_ (another one should be out to finish the trilogy soon). We have to understand that we must work as a global people. \n\nI hope that we can do that soon.
481449
It's not. The Bush administration refuses to admit that global warming exists.
888046
I guess I am not allowed to answer since I am concerned about global warming.  I am also concerned about the massive population explosion of dim wits.  Both are great causes of concern.  But since you did not ask for solutions I will not give you what you did not ask for.  You seek to get blabble babble static and drivle...
784857
Its a flaming brillliant excuse!! Brown can get extra money into his coffers and tell the public that he is doing it for their own good in order to save the environment!! but more importantly one has to ask why the UK has the highest taxes on fuel in EU and second highest in the world whilst China USA russia have relatively low taxes on fuel... therefore would brown hiking up taxes on fuel in the UK really help the environment or just put our businesses and economy on an uneven and unfair playing field with the global market!! COnsider the cost of travel, production of goods i.e manfacturing and logistics compared to USA because of our high fuel prices.... High fuel taxes cause us to lose our competivitness.. and gives other coutries a competitive advantage
751848
Its for the tax money. Global warming is just the excuse.
314675
Scientific data is ambiguous and conflicting as it pertains to "global warming." Current data only exists for a few hundred years. The rest is from computer "models" which use differing assumptions and yield differing results.\n\nSince no conclusive data exists upon which to base conclusions, actions ought not be based on inconclusive data. Those are facts rarely discussed or admitted globally.