Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Climate Emergency
Comments
-
To be fair to Chippy, in person he's a lovely bloke.Radostanradical said:
So we’ve got Mr. “Hardman” over here puffing his chest out with “Whose we and when were you put in charge”. Mate, you sound like a drunk uncle at Christmas who just discovered the caps lock key. “Whose we”? That’s the big power move? Grammar just tapped out and left the building.Chippycafc said:ME14addick said:
We still don't know what it is you think that humans do, that causes climate change. It's quite a simple question.Chippycafc said:
If your that concerned about the environment you could have walked or got an eco bus from where you live. But you didnt as its all fake.cantersaddick said:In case ol' Chipolata is wondering I have taken the train to the valley today as I always do, even though it would have been much quicker and cheaper to drive.
We know that you believe that the increase in the population is the cause, because you agreed with another poster on that, so you must have a reason for believing . We would really like to know.
Whose we and when were you put in charge a very arrogant stance if I must say so. I have answered you 4 times now.
Wonder how many of you tree huggers bothered turning up at the valley yesterday. Clearly some didn't bother to keep their carbon foot print down.
Dont worry we will keep the club going for you.
Then you try to flex with “I have answered you 4 times now.” Congrats, you can count to four. I am actually suprised by that revelation. You’re acting like you’ve been interrogated by the FBI when in reality you’re just recycling the same weak lines in a forum thread.
And oh boy, here comes the killer insult: “tree huggers.” Wow. Cutting edge stuff. Did you dig that out of a 1993 talk radio rant? You’re trying to sound like some rugged outlaw, but let’s be real, if you had to say this face‑to‑face, you’d be sweating through your shirt and praying nobody calls your bluff. Online you’re a lion, in person you’d fold faster than an ironing board.
Finally, the cherry on top: “Don’t worry we will keep the club going for you.” Translation: “Please notice me, I’m desperate to feel important.” You’re not the savior of the valley, mate, you’re just another guy cosplaying behind a keyboard.
4 -
A quick ChatGPT search finds that there are currently 417 nuclear power plants worldwide. The first of these was Sellafield in The UK. That went on line in 1956. In the subsequent 70 years there have been 3 significant nuclear incidents. Three Mile Island in The USA, (1979) Chernobyl in Ukraine (USSR) (1886) and Fukushima in Japan in 2011. The last two were the result of the regime in The USSR not necessarily the science and the Fukushima incident as a result of an earthquake. Now you might say so what and you’d probably be right but Japan has now implemented earthquake “friendly” nuclear power plants. The Soviet Union now uses superior western technology and the yanks have been meticulous in ensuring that the lessons were learned. In fact all three incidents have given rise to better safety. Is it foolproof ? Certainly not but I think it’s as safe as any other risk that humans accept. Without Nuclear Energy being more widely used we’re going to continue to be reliant on oil and gas and the climate harming effects it has. My belief is that we’re heading for the cliff edge and I’d say that increasing the use of nuclear energy is a very big tool in mitigating the effects of climate change.Stig said:
Three little words that make all the difference to my thinking. What is actually meant by that?ShootersHillGuru said:
We have the capability and wherewithal to make Nuclear Power Plants as safe as is possible. The technology is 70 years old. We might not have the capability to slow or reverse climate change. Use of nuclear is absolutely essential for both energy security and climate.Stig said:I'm sceptical of nuclear. Not because it wouldn't produce sufficiently cheap electricity, but because of the security implications. What happens should a rogue state or terrorist group decide to attack or what if there was some unforeseen natural disaster? Can we really be sure that we can safely contain all that radioactive material for all times under all circumstances? Frankly, I don't trust the powers that be to keep some tap water in a pipe without losing a good percentage of it. Why should I have any greater trust in their ability to contain radioactive material.3 -
@Chippycafc please forgive my ignorance for not seeing your 4 answers, so please could you remind me of the answers you gave and for the benefit of others who may have missed them too.Chippycafc said:ME14addick said:
We still don't know what it is you think that humans do, that causes climate change. It's quite a simple question.Chippycafc said:
If your that concerned about the environment you could have walked or got an eco bus from where you live. But you didnt as its all fake.cantersaddick said:In case ol' Chipolata is wondering I have taken the train to the valley today as I always do, even though it would have been much quicker and cheaper to drive.
We know that you believe that the increase in the population is the cause, because you agreed with another poster on that, so you must have a reason for believing . We would really like to know.
Whose we and when were you put in charge a very arrogant stance if I must say so. I have answered you 4 times now.
Wonder how many of you tree huggers bothered turning up at the valley yesterday. Clearly some didn't bother to keep their carbon foot print down.
Dont worry we will keep the club going for you.
The question was what is it that humans are doing that causes climate change? You had previously agreed that climate change is because of the massive increase in population.
I would love to be in a position to attend matches again, but for a number of reasons that isn't possible.3 -
My concern with nuclear isn't so much accidents but the decommissioning. Those who work on the decommissioning of nuclear plants have increased chances of cancer quite significantly. I just dont think anyone should be put in that position for a job.ShootersHillGuru said:
A quick ChatGPT search finds that there are currently 417 nuclear power plants worldwide. The first of these was Sellafield in The UK. That went on line in 1956. In the subsequent 70 years there have been 3 significant nuclear incidents. Three Mile Island in The USA, (1979) Chernobyl in Ukraine (USSR) (1886) and Fukushima in Japan in 2011. The last two were the result of the regime in The USSR not necessarily the science and the Fukushima incident as a result of an earthquake. Now you might say so what and you’d probably be right but Japan has now implemented earthquake “friendly” nuclear power plants. The Soviet Union now uses superior western technology and the yanks have been meticulous in ensuring that the lessons were learned. In fact all three incidents have given rise to better safety. Is it foolproof ? Certainly not but I think it’s as safe as any other risk that humans accept. Without Nuclear Energy being more widely used we’re going to continue to be reliant on oil and gas and the climate harming effects it has. My belief is that we’re heading for the cliff edge and I’d say that increasing the use of nuclear energy is a very big tool in mitigating the effects of climate change.Stig said:
Three little words that make all the difference to my thinking. What is actually meant by that?ShootersHillGuru said:
We have the capability and wherewithal to make Nuclear Power Plants as safe as is possible. The technology is 70 years old. We might not have the capability to slow or reverse climate change. Use of nuclear is absolutely essential for both energy security and climate.Stig said:I'm sceptical of nuclear. Not because it wouldn't produce sufficiently cheap electricity, but because of the security implications. What happens should a rogue state or terrorist group decide to attack or what if there was some unforeseen natural disaster? Can we really be sure that we can safely contain all that radioactive material for all times under all circumstances? Frankly, I don't trust the powers that be to keep some tap water in a pipe without losing a good percentage of it. Why should I have any greater trust in their ability to contain radioactive material.
But Small Modular Reactors (SMR's) are now a thing and are meant to be firstly more efficient than traditional reactors and also avoid the issues with decommissioning. I believe a series of them have already been commissioned at a site in Wales. For me, these are the future of Nuclear not traditional reactors.0 -
All good points and I can't refute any of them. It still doesn't sit easy with me though. I think the potential scale of the impact, should something go wrong, is what colours my judgement.ShootersHillGuru said:
A quick ChatGPT search finds that there are currently 417 nuclear power plants worldwide. The first of these was Sellafield in The UK. That went on line in 1956. In the subsequent 70 years there have been 3 significant nuclear incidents. Three Mile Island in The USA, (1979) Chernobyl in Ukraine (USSR) (1886) and Fukushima in Japan in 2011. The last two were the result of the regime in The USSR not necessarily the science and the Fukushima incident as a result of an earthquake. Now you might say so what and you’d probably be right but Japan has now implemented earthquake “friendly” nuclear power plants. The Soviet Union now uses superior western technology and the yanks have been meticulous in ensuring that the lessons were learned. In fact all three incidents have given rise to better safety. Is it foolproof ? Certainly not but I think it’s as safe as any other risk that humans accept. Without Nuclear Energy being more widely used we’re going to continue to be reliant on oil and gas and the climate harming effects it has. My belief is that we’re heading for the cliff edge and I’d say that increasing the use of nuclear energy is a very big tool in mitigating the effects of climate change.Stig said:
Three little words that make all the difference to my thinking. What is actually meant by that?ShootersHillGuru said:
We have the capability and wherewithal to make Nuclear Power Plants as safe as is possible. The technology is 70 years old. We might not have the capability to slow or reverse climate change. Use of nuclear is absolutely essential for both energy security and climate.Stig said:I'm sceptical of nuclear. Not because it wouldn't produce sufficiently cheap electricity, but because of the security implications. What happens should a rogue state or terrorist group decide to attack or what if there was some unforeseen natural disaster? Can we really be sure that we can safely contain all that radioactive material for all times under all circumstances? Frankly, I don't trust the powers that be to keep some tap water in a pipe without losing a good percentage of it. Why should I have any greater trust in their ability to contain radioactive material.0 -
Agreed. It's like the discussion on the safety of vaping vs smoking. There's anecdotal opinion that some people who vape constantly develop lung conditions. There's empirical evidence that millions of people die every year from lung cancer caused unequivocally by smoking. Nobody with a brain thinks that weaning people off smoking and on to vaping isn't a good way to fight lung cancer. Same with nuclear power.ShootersHillGuru said:
We have the capability and wherewithal to make Nuclear Power Plants as safe as is possible. The technology is 70 years old. We might not have the capability to slow or reverse climate change. Use of nuclear is absolutely essential for both energy security and climate.Stig said:I'm sceptical of nuclear. Not because it wouldn't produce sufficiently cheap electricity, but because of the security implications. What happens should a rogue state or terrorist group decide to attack or what if there was some unforeseen natural disaster? Can we really be sure that we can safely contain all that radioactive material for all times under all circumstances? Frankly, I don't trust the powers that be to keep some tap water in a pipe without losing a good percentage of it. Why should I have any greater trust in their ability to contain radioactive material.
Incidentally, a lot of the same contrarians who think vaccines contain 5g trackers and climate change is a hoax are the same people who say vaping is dangerous...2 -
Good too see someone poking their big nose in someone else business and wow I like paragraphs of self assessment coming my way all that does is make me laugh amongst many other things. I suspect you've had those said to you before, a rude and ignorant post and assumption.Radostanradical said:
So we’ve got Mr. “Hardman” over here puffing his chest out with “Whose we and when were you put in charge”. Mate, you sound like a drunk uncle at Christmas who just discovered the caps lock key. “Whose we”? That’s the big power move? Grammar just tapped out and left the building.Chippycafc said:ME14addick said:
We still don't know what it is you think that humans do, that causes climate change. It's quite a simple question.Chippycafc said:
If your that concerned about the environment you could have walked or got an eco bus from where you live. But you didnt as its all fake.cantersaddick said:In case ol' Chipolata is wondering I have taken the train to the valley today as I always do, even though it would have been much quicker and cheaper to drive.
We know that you believe that the increase in the population is the cause, because you agreed with another poster on that, so you must have a reason for believing . We would really like to know.
Whose we and when were you put in charge a very arrogant stance if I must say so. I have answered you 4 times now.
Wonder how many of you tree huggers bothered turning up at the valley yesterday. Clearly some didn't bother to keep their carbon foot print down.
Dont worry we will keep the club going for you.
Then you try to flex with “I have answered you 4 times now.” Congrats, you can count to four. I am actually suprised by that revelation. You’re acting like you’ve been interrogated by the FBI when in reality you’re just recycling the same weak lines in a forum thread.
And oh boy, here comes the killer insult: “tree huggers.” Wow. Cutting edge stuff. Did you dig that out of a 1993 talk radio rant? You’re trying to sound like some rugged outlaw, but let’s be real, if you had to say this face‑to‑face, you’d be sweating through your shirt and praying nobody calls your bluff. Online you’re a lion, in person you’d fold faster than an ironing board.
Finally, the cherry on top: “Don’t worry we will keep the club going for you.” Translation: “Please notice me, I’m desperate to feel important.” You’re not the savior of the valley, mate, you’re just another guy cosplaying behind a keyboard.
Happy for you to come and meet me at any time face to face everyone know's where I am match day. And for noticing me I am not the one posting here all day everyday when I am supposed to be working... Isn't that fraud.
Well you certainly have fitted into your look at me everyone crap I am important with this rubbish.
Whose we.5 -
Stig said:
To be fair to Chippy, in person he's a lovely bloke.Radostanradical said:
So we’ve got Mr. “Hardman” over here puffing his chest out with “Whose we and when were you put in charge”. Mate, you sound like a drunk uncle at Christmas who just discovered the caps lock key. “Whose we”? That’s the big power move? Grammar just tapped out and left the building.Chippycafc said:ME14addick said:
We still don't know what it is you think that humans do, that causes climate change. It's quite a simple question.Chippycafc said:
If your that concerned about the environment you could have walked or got an eco bus from where you live. But you didnt as its all fake.cantersaddick said:In case ol' Chipolata is wondering I have taken the train to the valley today as I always do, even though it would have been much quicker and cheaper to drive.
We know that you believe that the increase in the population is the cause, because you agreed with another poster on that, so you must have a reason for believing . We would really like to know.
Whose we and when were you put in charge a very arrogant stance if I must say so. I have answered you 4 times now.
Wonder how many of you tree huggers bothered turning up at the valley yesterday. Clearly some didn't bother to keep their carbon foot print down.
Dont worry we will keep the club going for you.
Then you try to flex with “I have answered you 4 times now.” Congrats, you can count to four. I am actually suprised by that revelation. You’re acting like you’ve been interrogated by the FBI when in reality you’re just recycling the same weak lines in a forum thread.
And oh boy, here comes the killer insult: “tree huggers.” Wow. Cutting edge stuff. Did you dig that out of a 1993 talk radio rant? You’re trying to sound like some rugged outlaw, but let’s be real, if you had to say this face‑to‑face, you’d be sweating through your shirt and praying nobody calls your bluff. Online you’re a lion, in person you’d fold faster than an ironing board.
Finally, the cherry on top: “Don’t worry we will keep the club going for you.” Translation: “Please notice me, I’m desperate to feel important.” You’re not the savior of the valley, mate, you’re just another guy cosplaying behind a keyboard.
Thanks mate, although we have differences in some areas we were adult enough to have a laugh whilst sharing a pint following our team
That rant says more about them than anyone else... A look at me type of rant.
I left my mane at home that day.4 -
Certainly the use of SMR’s is the way forward and something I failed to consider. It’s a newer tech you course which often comes with its own issues and it would mean that a nuclear reactor albeit small was far more widespread. Not necessarily a problem but nonetheless?cantersaddick said:
My concern with nuclear isn't so much accidents but the decommissioning. Those who work on the decommissioning of nuclear plants have increased chances of cancer quite significantly. I just dont think anyone should be put in that position for a job.ShootersHillGuru said:
A quick ChatGPT search finds that there are currently 417 nuclear power plants worldwide. The first of these was Sellafield in The UK. That went on line in 1956. In the subsequent 70 years there have been 3 significant nuclear incidents. Three Mile Island in The USA, (1979) Chernobyl in Ukraine (USSR) (1886) and Fukushima in Japan in 2011. The last two were the result of the regime in The USSR not necessarily the science and the Fukushima incident as a result of an earthquake. Now you might say so what and you’d probably be right but Japan has now implemented earthquake “friendly” nuclear power plants. The Soviet Union now uses superior western technology and the yanks have been meticulous in ensuring that the lessons were learned. In fact all three incidents have given rise to better safety. Is it foolproof ? Certainly not but I think it’s as safe as any other risk that humans accept. Without Nuclear Energy being more widely used we’re going to continue to be reliant on oil and gas and the climate harming effects it has. My belief is that we’re heading for the cliff edge and I’d say that increasing the use of nuclear energy is a very big tool in mitigating the effects of climate change.Stig said:
Three little words that make all the difference to my thinking. What is actually meant by that?ShootersHillGuru said:
We have the capability and wherewithal to make Nuclear Power Plants as safe as is possible. The technology is 70 years old. We might not have the capability to slow or reverse climate change. Use of nuclear is absolutely essential for both energy security and climate.Stig said:I'm sceptical of nuclear. Not because it wouldn't produce sufficiently cheap electricity, but because of the security implications. What happens should a rogue state or terrorist group decide to attack or what if there was some unforeseen natural disaster? Can we really be sure that we can safely contain all that radioactive material for all times under all circumstances? Frankly, I don't trust the powers that be to keep some tap water in a pipe without losing a good percentage of it. Why should I have any greater trust in their ability to contain radioactive material.
But Small Modular Reactors (SMR's) are now a thing and are meant to be firstly more efficient than traditional reactors and also avoid the issues with decommissioning. I believe a series of them have already been commissioned at a site in Wales. For me, these are the future of Nuclear not traditional reactors.1 -
DittoChippycafc said:Stig said:
To be fair to Chippy, in person he's a lovely bloke.Radostanradical said:
So we’ve got Mr. “Hardman” over here puffing his chest out with “Whose we and when were you put in charge”. Mate, you sound like a drunk uncle at Christmas who just discovered the caps lock key. “Whose we”? That’s the big power move? Grammar just tapped out and left the building.Chippycafc said:ME14addick said:
We still don't know what it is you think that humans do, that causes climate change. It's quite a simple question.Chippycafc said:
If your that concerned about the environment you could have walked or got an eco bus from where you live. But you didnt as its all fake.cantersaddick said:In case ol' Chipolata is wondering I have taken the train to the valley today as I always do, even though it would have been much quicker and cheaper to drive.
We know that you believe that the increase in the population is the cause, because you agreed with another poster on that, so you must have a reason for believing . We would really like to know.
Whose we and when were you put in charge a very arrogant stance if I must say so. I have answered you 4 times now.
Wonder how many of you tree huggers bothered turning up at the valley yesterday. Clearly some didn't bother to keep their carbon foot print down.
Dont worry we will keep the club going for you.
Then you try to flex with “I have answered you 4 times now.” Congrats, you can count to four. I am actually suprised by that revelation. You’re acting like you’ve been interrogated by the FBI when in reality you’re just recycling the same weak lines in a forum thread.
And oh boy, here comes the killer insult: “tree huggers.” Wow. Cutting edge stuff. Did you dig that out of a 1993 talk radio rant? You’re trying to sound like some rugged outlaw, but let’s be real, if you had to say this face‑to‑face, you’d be sweating through your shirt and praying nobody calls your bluff. Online you’re a lion, in person you’d fold faster than an ironing board.
Finally, the cherry on top: “Don’t worry we will keep the club going for you.” Translation: “Please notice me, I’m desperate to feel important.” You’re not the savior of the valley, mate, you’re just another guy cosplaying behind a keyboard.
Thanks mate, although we have differences in some areas we were adult enough to have a laugh whilst sharing a pint following our team
That rant says more about them than anyone else... A look at me type of rant.
I left my mane at home that day.3 -
Sponsored links:
-
Call me a conspiracy theorist nut job, but after @ShootersHillGuru said Elvis worked in a fish and chip I did some research and it’s only true! I’m a believer here is the evidence before you call me stupid canters 😂
1 -
ShootersHillGuru said:
DittoChippycafc said:Stig said:
To be fair to Chippy, in person he's a lovely bloke.Radostanradical said:
So we’ve got Mr. “Hardman” over here puffing his chest out with “Whose we and when were you put in charge”. Mate, you sound like a drunk uncle at Christmas who just discovered the caps lock key. “Whose we”? That’s the big power move? Grammar just tapped out and left the building.Chippycafc said:ME14addick said:
We still don't know what it is you think that humans do, that causes climate change. It's quite a simple question.Chippycafc said:
If your that concerned about the environment you could have walked or got an eco bus from where you live. But you didnt as its all fake.cantersaddick said:In case ol' Chipolata is wondering I have taken the train to the valley today as I always do, even though it would have been much quicker and cheaper to drive.
We know that you believe that the increase in the population is the cause, because you agreed with another poster on that, so you must have a reason for believing . We would really like to know.
Whose we and when were you put in charge a very arrogant stance if I must say so. I have answered you 4 times now.
Wonder how many of you tree huggers bothered turning up at the valley yesterday. Clearly some didn't bother to keep their carbon foot print down.
Dont worry we will keep the club going for you.
Then you try to flex with “I have answered you 4 times now.” Congrats, you can count to four. I am actually suprised by that revelation. You’re acting like you’ve been interrogated by the FBI when in reality you’re just recycling the same weak lines in a forum thread.
And oh boy, here comes the killer insult: “tree huggers.” Wow. Cutting edge stuff. Did you dig that out of a 1993 talk radio rant? You’re trying to sound like some rugged outlaw, but let’s be real, if you had to say this face‑to‑face, you’d be sweating through your shirt and praying nobody calls your bluff. Online you’re a lion, in person you’d fold faster than an ironing board.
Finally, the cherry on top: “Don’t worry we will keep the club going for you.” Translation: “Please notice me, I’m desperate to feel important.” You’re not the savior of the valley, mate, you’re just another guy cosplaying behind a keyboard.
Thanks mate, although we have differences in some areas we were adult enough to have a laugh whilst sharing a pint following our team
That rant says more about them than anyone else... A look at me type of rant.
I left my mane at home that day.
Just for you shoots.. The decommission of such plant is years ahead of where we were a few years ago. It is an extremely costly process and waste materials are disposed as economically and safe as possible.
Most problems when they do arise is usually by human error by someone trying to shortcut a process.1 -
What are you even talking about “cosplay behind a keyboard” “fold faster than an ironing board” like a failed rapper/Scientist who has lost his mind.Radostanradical said:
So we’ve got Mr. “Hardman” over here puffing his chest out with “Whose we and when were you put in charge”. Mate, you sound like a drunk uncle at Christmas who just discovered the caps lock key. “Whose we”? That’s the big power move? Grammar just tapped out and left the building.Chippycafc said:ME14addick said:
We still don't know what it is you think that humans do, that causes climate change. It's quite a simple question.Chippycafc said:
If your that concerned about the environment you could have walked or got an eco bus from where you live. But you didnt as its all fake.cantersaddick said:In case ol' Chipolata is wondering I have taken the train to the valley today as I always do, even though it would have been much quicker and cheaper to drive.
We know that you believe that the increase in the population is the cause, because you agreed with another poster on that, so you must have a reason for believing . We would really like to know.
Whose we and when were you put in charge a very arrogant stance if I must say so. I have answered you 4 times now.
Wonder how many of you tree huggers bothered turning up at the valley yesterday. Clearly some didn't bother to keep their carbon foot print down.
Dont worry we will keep the club going for you.
Then you try to flex with “I have answered you 4 times now.” Congrats, you can count to four. I am actually suprised by that revelation. You’re acting like you’ve been interrogated by the FBI when in reality you’re just recycling the same weak lines in a forum thread.
And oh boy, here comes the killer insult: “tree huggers.” Wow. Cutting edge stuff. Did you dig that out of a 1993 talk radio rant? You’re trying to sound like some rugged outlaw, but let’s be real, if you had to say this face‑to‑face, you’d be sweating through your shirt and praying nobody calls your bluff. Online you’re a lion, in person you’d fold faster than an ironing board.
Finally, the cherry on top: “Don’t worry we will keep the club going for you.” Translation: “Please notice me, I’m desperate to feel important.” You’re not the savior of the valley, mate, you’re just another guy cosplaying behind a keyboard.1 -
What’s an ironing board?Some sort of West Ham board game?3
-
@Chippycafc I've searched for your replies, but can't find them.Chippycafc said:ME14addick said:
We still don't know what it is you think that humans do, that causes climate change. It's quite a simple question.Chippycafc said:
If your that concerned about the environment you could have walked or got an eco bus from where you live. But you didnt as its all fake.cantersaddick said:In case ol' Chipolata is wondering I have taken the train to the valley today as I always do, even though it would have been much quicker and cheaper to drive.
We know that you believe that the increase in the population is the cause, because you agreed with another poster on that, so you must have a reason for believing . We would really like to know.
Whose we and when were you put in charge a very arrogant stance if I must say so. I have answered you 4 times now.
Wonder how many of you tree huggers bothered turning up at the valley yesterday. Clearly some didn't bother to keep their carbon foot print down.
Dont worry we will keep the club going for you.
Do you or do you not believe in man made climate change?0 -
Were you a bully at school. BTW I have took my mane off.ME14addick said:
@Chippycafc I've searched for your replies, but can't find them.Chippycafc said:ME14addick said:
We still don't know what it is you think that humans do, that causes climate change. It's quite a simple question.Chippycafc said:
If your that concerned about the environment you could have walked or got an eco bus from where you live. But you didnt as its all fake.cantersaddick said:In case ol' Chipolata is wondering I have taken the train to the valley today as I always do, even though it would have been much quicker and cheaper to drive.
We know that you believe that the increase in the population is the cause, because you agreed with another poster on that, so you must have a reason for believing . We would really like to know.
Whose we and when were you put in charge a very arrogant stance if I must say so. I have answered you 4 times now.
Wonder how many of you tree huggers bothered turning up at the valley yesterday. Clearly some didn't bother to keep their carbon foot print down.
Dont worry we will keep the club going for you.
Do you or do you not believe in man made climate change?
Whose we.0 -
I’d say it’s likely he’s worried about keeping his syrup on.MuttleyCAFC said:
This has irritated me in the past. I made the decision not to use gas but am aware gas is used to produce electricity. It is about time we decoupled electricity prices from gas and decreased the amounts of gas being used. Does anybody get Trumps hatred of wind farms? Surely they are a good thing whereas drilling is a bad thing. They won't solve the problem in themselves but have to be part of the solution. This country should be much further down the line in terms of green energy but there are those trying to push back on it further.ME14addick said:
Under the UK’s current wholesale market design, the price of electricity is usually set by the highest‑cost generator needed to meet demand, and that generator is most often gas.mathew_davey said:ME14addick said:
Have you read the rest of the posts over the last few days?mathew_davey said:
Do you mean the UK population, the west, or the whole world. Because if you just the UK, you're going to have to convince me that a population that produces 1-2% of the world's carbon emissions are really going to have any meaningful impact on the climate.SELR_addicks said:The issue isn't really the climate change sceptics; they're largely off to the side.The bigger problem is that the population as a whole doesn't have the stomach for the economic and lifestyle sacrifices required to seriously tackle climate change. There's a huge difference between saying we need to save the planet and accepting the costs involved in actually doing so.What's particularly interesting is that the people with the greatest electoral influence (the eldest/boomers) are often those least likely to experience the long-term consequences of decisions being made today and therefore vote against future interests.
When you have India and China doing who have a combined 41% if the world's carbon emissions. If we was serious about climate change the first change would be stop trade with these countries until they come in line with our emissions per person(less so India as they only produce about 8% however) at the same time, how can you tell people who for the first generation in human history that don't really have food insecurity and an improving standard of life for their that they need to slow down and potentially go backwards.
What's even more funny is all these renewables have just made us more expensive,less energy secure, and less able to make a meaningful impact on the climate.
You are wrong on just about eveything you've said and all your points have already been covered.
Your food security is being severely tested by climate change. Crop yields for almost everything is well down this year, shortages are likely leading to higher prices.
Renewables are cheaper, but electricity prices are linked to the most expensive form of electricity generation and that is gas. The sooner all our electricity is generated by renewables the cheaper it will be.
Food security issues right now is more tied to war and our rising energy costs which has had less of an impact on new industrial powerhouses, which is the point I making.ME14addick said:
Have you read the rest of the posts over the last few days?mathew_davey said:
Do you mean the UK population, the west, or the whole world. Because if you just the UK, you're going to have to convince me that a population that produces 1-2% of the world's carbon emissions are really going to have any meaningful impact on the climate.SELR_addicks said:The issue isn't really the climate change sceptics; they're largely off to the side.The bigger problem is that the population as a whole doesn't have the stomach for the economic and lifestyle sacrifices required to seriously tackle climate change. There's a huge difference between saying we need to save the planet and accepting the costs involved in actually doing so.What's particularly interesting is that the people with the greatest electoral influence (the eldest/boomers) are often those least likely to experience the long-term consequences of decisions being made today and therefore vote against future interests.
When you have India and China doing who have a combined 41% if the world's carbon emissions. If we was serious about climate change the first change would be stop trade with these countries until they come in line with our emissions per person(less so India as they only produce about 8% however) at the same time, how can you tell people who for the first generation in human history that don't really have food insecurity and an improving standard of life for their that they need to slow down and potentially go backwards.
What's even more funny is all these renewables have just made us more expensive,less energy secure, and less able to make a meaningful impact on the climate.
You are wrong on just about eveything you've said and all your points have already been covered.
Your food security is being severely tested by climate change. Crop yields for almost everything is well down this year, shortages are likely leading to higher prices.
Renewables are cheaper, but electricity prices are linked to the most expensive form of electricity generation and that is gas. The sooner all our electricity is generated by renewables the cheaper it will be.
Secondly your renewables are cheaper bollox just isn't true. If it was the government wouldn't need to get involved the market would do it. As when you consider the cost to maintain, the reliability, and also balancing the power grid (look at Spain's blackouts this year) wind, solar and tidal just aren't where they need to be yet.
Now if where talking nuclear Which is clean, and relatively safe now. I just don't understand why we aren't going down this route.
I think you believe I'm a climate change denier. It's clearly happening and getting worse, however I haven't seen a good argument why my way of life should suffer even more, when what we are doing isn't making a meaningful impact.How the pricing mechanism works
Under Great Britain’s pay‑as‑clear system, all generators are paid the same market price for a given half‑hour period. That price is set by the marginal generator — the last (and usually most expensive) plant needed to meet demand.
Gas‑fired power stations frequently act as this marginal generator.
As a result, even cheap renewables (wind, solar) get paid a price determined by gas.
This mechanism is explicitly confirmed in multiple analyses:
The Guardian explains that “the market price of electricity is determined by the most expensive source of available power generation… In the UK, more often than not, the cost of running gas plants sets the price for the entire system.”
UKERC finds that gas‑fired generators set the wholesale price around 90% of the time in 2025.
Legal analysis from Travers Smith notes that gas sets the price around 60% of the time, depending on conditions.
The exact percentage varies by year and methodology, but the conclusion is consistent: gas overwhelmingly determines the wholesale electricity price.
Why this matters
Even though renewables now supply nearly half of Britain’s electricity, many of them still sell into the wholesale market and therefore receive gas‑linked prices. This means:
UK electricity prices rise when global gas prices spike.
Consumers pay more even when most electricity is generated cheaply.
Renewables do not automatically lower bills unless they are under fixed‑price Contracts for Difference (CfDs).
UKERC estimates that two‑thirds of the rise in household electricity bills since 2021 is due to higher gas prices.
Is the UK changing this system?
Yes. The government has announced measures to decouple electricity prices from gas, including:
A new Wholesale Contracts for Difference (WCfD) scheme for existing low‑carbon generators.
Increasing the Electricity Generator Levy.
These reforms aim to reduce the dominance of gas in price‑setting.
2 -
Chippycafc said:
Were you a bully at school. BTW I have took my mane off.ME14addick said:
@Chippycafc I've searched for your replies, but can't find them.Chippycafc said:ME14addick said:
We still don't know what it is you think that humans do, that causes climate change. It's quite a simple question.Chippycafc said:
If your that concerned about the environment you could have walked or got an eco bus from where you live. But you didnt as its all fake.cantersaddick said:In case ol' Chipolata is wondering I have taken the train to the valley today as I always do, even though it would have been much quicker and cheaper to drive.
We know that you believe that the increase in the population is the cause, because you agreed with another poster on that, so you must have a reason for believing . We would really like to know.
Whose we and when were you put in charge a very arrogant stance if I must say so. I have answered you 4 times now.
Wonder how many of you tree huggers bothered turning up at the valley yesterday. Clearly some didn't bother to keep their carbon foot print down.
Dont worry we will keep the club going for you.
Do you or do you not believe in man made climate change?
.0 -
I abhor bullies Chippy, I really don't think asking a simple question is bullying.Chippycafc said:
Were you a bully at school. BTW I have took my mane off.ME14addick said:
@Chippycafc I've searched for your replies, but can't find them.Chippycafc said:ME14addick said:
We still don't know what it is you think that humans do, that causes climate change. It's quite a simple question.Chippycafc said:
If your that concerned about the environment you could have walked or got an eco bus from where you live. But you didnt as its all fake.cantersaddick said:In case ol' Chipolata is wondering I have taken the train to the valley today as I always do, even though it would have been much quicker and cheaper to drive.
We know that you believe that the increase in the population is the cause, because you agreed with another poster on that, so you must have a reason for believing . We would really like to know.
Whose we and when were you put in charge a very arrogant stance if I must say so. I have answered you 4 times now.
Wonder how many of you tree huggers bothered turning up at the valley yesterday. Clearly some didn't bother to keep their carbon foot print down.
Dont worry we will keep the club going for you.
Do you or do you not believe in man made climate change?
Whose we.
I can only draw my own conclusions from your reluctance to answer.
Who's we? I'm sure others are interested in your views too.0 -
ME14addick said:
I abhor bullies Chippy, I really don't think asking a simple question is bullying.Chippycafc said:
Were you a bully at school. BTW I have took my mane off.ME14addick said:
@Chippycafc I've searched for your replies, but can't find them.Chippycafc said:ME14addick said:
We still don't know what it is you think that humans do, that causes climate change. It's quite a simple question.Chippycafc said:
If your that concerned about the environment you could have walked or got an eco bus from where you live. But you didnt as its all fake.cantersaddick said:In case ol' Chipolata is wondering I have taken the train to the valley today as I always do, even though it would have been much quicker and cheaper to drive.
We know that you believe that the increase in the population is the cause, because you agreed with another poster on that, so you must have a reason for believing . We would really like to know.
Whose we and when were you put in charge a very arrogant stance if I must say so. I have answered you 4 times now.
Wonder how many of you tree huggers bothered turning up at the valley yesterday. Clearly some didn't bother to keep their carbon foot print down.
Dont worry we will keep the club going for you.
Do you or do you not believe in man made climate change?
Whose we.
I can only draw my own conclusions from your reluctance to answer.
Who's we? I'm sure others are interested in your views too.
Keep mythering a person with the same boring question about something they never mentioned is bullying.
You've had your answer so get on with it.5 -
Sponsored links:
-
It's usually a fair assumption that if you ask someone something several times and they're unable to answer, it's because they either don't know the answer or don't understand the question.
And, when that happens, it's often best to assume both and just move on.10 -
Might want to bear that in mind next time you go to ask someone about the car they drive and where they go on holiday.Chippycafc said:ME14addick said:
I abhor bullies Chippy, I really don't think asking a simple question is bullying.Chippycafc said:
Were you a bully at school. BTW I have took my mane off.ME14addick said:
@Chippycafc I've searched for your replies, but can't find them.Chippycafc said:ME14addick said:
We still don't know what it is you think that humans do, that causes climate change. It's quite a simple question.Chippycafc said:
If your that concerned about the environment you could have walked or got an eco bus from where you live. But you didnt as its all fake.cantersaddick said:In case ol' Chipolata is wondering I have taken the train to the valley today as I always do, even though it would have been much quicker and cheaper to drive.
We know that you believe that the increase in the population is the cause, because you agreed with another poster on that, so you must have a reason for believing . We would really like to know.
Whose we and when were you put in charge a very arrogant stance if I must say so. I have answered you 4 times now.
Wonder how many of you tree huggers bothered turning up at the valley yesterday. Clearly some didn't bother to keep their carbon foot print down.
Dont worry we will keep the club going for you.
Do you or do you not believe in man made climate change?
Whose we.
I can only draw my own conclusions from your reluctance to answer.
Who's we? I'm sure others are interested in your views too.
Keep mythering a person with the same boring question about something they never mentioned is bullying.
You've had your answer so get on with it.7 -
Mainly Antarctic ice. The rock underneath is black and it’s role was underplayed in previous climate modelling.ME14addick said:
Yes, recent scientific studies confirm that the pace of global warming has accelerated significantly over the last decade. Earth's warming rate nearly doubled from roughly 0.2°C per decade (1970–2015) to about 0.35°C per decade.swordfish said:
Well now you say that, but, unless I'm much mistaken, the rate of climate change is accelerating faster than some scientists were forecasting, things happening already that they weren't expecting.bobmunro said:swordfish said:
That's something we can all look forward to then 🤣MuttleyCAFC said:Venus once had a climite like Earths. Volcanic activity caused greenhouse gasses to take over and now it is as harsh as it is possible to be.
None of us will ever see it!
Can't think of any examples though, so I might have imaginrd that. Polar ice melt predictions perhaps?
Melting of Arctic ice and permafrost have hastened climate change.
Without the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions already achieved, it would be even worse.2 -
Leroy Ambrose said:
Why the fuck do people with these views instantly think someone calling their bullshit out is being 'hard'? Not everything in your life is a fight for fucks sake. Sometimes you'll encounter someone so exasperated at your wilful ignorance that they'll use florid language. Nobody is 'offering you out'TD_Addick said:
Again you're saying things that I'm not interested in, I'm not a conspiracy theorist although Elvis one in a chip shop sounds interesting let's talk about that 🤣sounds more fun than hearing angry Leroy think he is a hard man.ShootersHillGuru said:
Oh my. Free will you say. You don’t have any more or less than any of us. You just get your information and form your opinions based on sad little people who enjoy disseminating misinformation for the craic. They know scientifically illiterate people will believe it in the same way they believe that vapour trails from aeroplanes are spraying us or Elvis is working in a chip shop in Doncaster. The majority of people chose to exercise their free will by listening to scientists who spend their careers studying in their particular fields. Who use evidence to back up their claims. Just look at the people you align your views with. Trump, Farage, Tice, to name but three. You tell me what an impartial observer to this discussion would make of it.TD_Addick said:
The funny thing is all you ever do is swear and insult people who have different opinion to you which is fine, but that’s more child like and immature very one dimensional thinking. I noticed especially with you it’s always “those bloody scientists what do they know” here we have proof that one is lying and lied about a massive global event and your response is yet let’s just insult the person.Leroy Ambrose said:
You have a child's understanding of science. In fact, that isn't strictly true. Children understand science more clearly than this. The scientific method is literally one of the first things you learn in school. You have an appreciation for the scientific method on par with, say, a cat. Or a woodlouse.TD_Addick said:Radostanradical said:
Lmao here we go again. Every time someone pipes up with “FAUCI LIED,” I swear a new conspiracy theorist is born who thinks watching one YouTube vid makes them a world‑class virologist.TD_Addick said:
Ducking the question about Fauci I see. What conspiracy are you talking about?ShootersHillGuru said:
So I’m right then. You’re just another conspiracy theorist with nutty views and are too afraid to actually spell them out.TD_Addick said:
Fauci or RFK couldn't care less because ultimately I'm not American the point I make is Fauci is a senior figure and scientist who lied. The climate change fear mongers love scientists, he lied and is a scientist.ShootersHillGuru said:TD_Addick has disappeared without answering who he’d prefer in charge. Fauci or RFK Jnr. I think if he gives the truthful answer we’ll all know enough about where he’s coming from.Like seriously, the guy changes guidance because, y’know, new info exists, and half the internet goes “AH‑HA!! GOTCHA!!” as if they cracked some Da Vinci code instead of just not understanding how science works.Newsflash: if you think “updating advice” = “lying,” then idk what to tell you except maybe stop treating your Facebook feed like a peer‑reviewed journal.The funniest part is how dramatic people get.Masks changed? “HE LIED.”Lab leak debate evolved? “HE LIED.”You misread a headline from 2020? “HE LIED.”Bro, calm down. Not every shift in public health messaging is a global conspiracy run from Fauci’s basement with a chalkboard and red string. Sometimes stuff just… changes. That’s how reality works. Sorry if that offends your personal fanfiction.Anyway, carry on with the next “Fauci lied” post. I’m sure it’ll be totally unique and not the same reheated nonsense we’ve all seen 500 times before. Swear this is just more evidence that democrqcy is no longer feasible.
You all can think I’m thick or stupid whatever, sticks and stones and all that, I’ve built a very comfortable life for myself and have a great career, not bad for someone with a small brain who doesn’t read books according to fraudster Canters. All I am is a person who sees it differently to you and that my friend is the gift of free will.
Jesus H Christ.
2 -
Gillis said:
Might want to bear that in mind next time you go to ask someone about the car they drive and where they go on holiday.Chippycafc said:ME14addick said:
I abhor bullies Chippy, I really don't think asking a simple question is bullying.Chippycafc said:
Were you a bully at school. BTW I have took my mane off.ME14addick said:
@Chippycafc I've searched for your replies, but can't find them.Chippycafc said:ME14addick said:
We still don't know what it is you think that humans do, that causes climate change. It's quite a simple question.Chippycafc said:
If your that concerned about the environment you could have walked or got an eco bus from where you live. But you didnt as its all fake.cantersaddick said:In case ol' Chipolata is wondering I have taken the train to the valley today as I always do, even though it would have been much quicker and cheaper to drive.
We know that you believe that the increase in the population is the cause, because you agreed with another poster on that, so you must have a reason for believing . We would really like to know.
Whose we and when were you put in charge a very arrogant stance if I must say so. I have answered you 4 times now.
Wonder how many of you tree huggers bothered turning up at the valley yesterday. Clearly some didn't bother to keep their carbon foot print down.
Dont worry we will keep the club going for you.
Do you or do you not believe in man made climate change?
Whose we.
I can only draw my own conclusions from your reluctance to answer.
Who's we? I'm sure others are interested in your views too.
Keep mythering a person with the same boring question about something they never mentioned is bullying.
You've had your answer so get on with it.
I do but I don't preach to the almighty that we should do something then do the opposite myself.
2 -
It usually a fair assumption that when someone asks you a question, 4 times, after you've given the answer the first time, that they and their cohorts have a major issue understanding basics.
It's also a fair assumption that when someone asks you a question about resources when the topic in the box was about people, that they and their cohorts have a major issue understanding basics.
Especially after the second time of asking you tell them you are under no obligation to answer anything. Again not understanding of basics.
And when that happens it's best to assume all and move on.4 -
Lol typical I know you are but what am I playground tactics. I could tear this apart but clearly this is an intellectual mismatch and you are out of your depth.Chippycafc said:
Good too see someone poking their big nose in someone else business and wow I like paragraphs of self assessment coming my way all that does is make me laugh amongst many other things. I suspect you've had those said to you before, a rude and ignorant post and assumption.Radostanradical said:
So we’ve got Mr. “Hardman” over here puffing his chest out with “Whose we and when were you put in charge”. Mate, you sound like a drunk uncle at Christmas who just discovered the caps lock key. “Whose we”? That’s the big power move? Grammar just tapped out and left the building.Chippycafc said:ME14addick said:
We still don't know what it is you think that humans do, that causes climate change. It's quite a simple question.Chippycafc said:
If your that concerned about the environment you could have walked or got an eco bus from where you live. But you didnt as its all fake.cantersaddick said:In case ol' Chipolata is wondering I have taken the train to the valley today as I always do, even though it would have been much quicker and cheaper to drive.
We know that you believe that the increase in the population is the cause, because you agreed with another poster on that, so you must have a reason for believing . We would really like to know.
Whose we and when were you put in charge a very arrogant stance if I must say so. I have answered you 4 times now.
Wonder how many of you tree huggers bothered turning up at the valley yesterday. Clearly some didn't bother to keep their carbon foot print down.
Dont worry we will keep the club going for you.
Then you try to flex with “I have answered you 4 times now.” Congrats, you can count to four. I am actually suprised by that revelation. You’re acting like you’ve been interrogated by the FBI when in reality you’re just recycling the same weak lines in a forum thread.
And oh boy, here comes the killer insult: “tree huggers.” Wow. Cutting edge stuff. Did you dig that out of a 1993 talk radio rant? You’re trying to sound like some rugged outlaw, but let’s be real, if you had to say this face‑to‑face, you’d be sweating through your shirt and praying nobody calls your bluff. Online you’re a lion, in person you’d fold faster than an ironing board.
Finally, the cherry on top: “Don’t worry we will keep the club going for you.” Translation: “Please notice me, I’m desperate to feel important.” You’re not the savior of the valley, mate, you’re just another guy cosplaying behind a keyboard.
Happy for you to come and meet me at any time face to face everyone know's where I am match day. And for noticing me I am not the one posting here all day everyday when I am supposed to be working... Isn't that fraud.
Well you certainly have fitted into your look at me everyone crap I am important with this rubbish.
Whose we.
What on earth are you talking about, working? Fraud? 🤣 no one mentioned that and its a weekend.
My time is far too importang to waste on you, sso will leave it now. You have my permission to carry on though I probably wont bother replying.2 -
It's usually a fair assumption that when someone repeatedly asks for information that they either can't find what you say you've sent or can't understand it. The best communicators work on the basis that in an adult world such problems are down to the sender and do their very best to set matters straight.Chippycafc said:It usually a fair assumption that when someone asks you a question, 4 times, after you've given the answer the first time, that they and their cohorts have a major issue understanding basics.
It's also a fair assumption that when someone asks you a question about resources when the topic in the box was about people, that they and their cohorts have a major issue understanding basics.
Especially after the second time of asking you tell them you are under no obligation to answer anything. Again not understanding of basics.
And when that happens it's best to assume all and move on.
The fuss and blister you've made suggests to me that you don't want to answer because you know that if you do your position won't stand up to scrutiny. It would have been far easier for you to answer Emmy nicely than to put up a fight about it. Come on, it's a forum, why are you frightened of responding nicely?9 -
So,Where to from here...?I'm always interested in finding out why someone expresses opposing views to mine.First it's only fair that I begin by stating my position:
I think that climate change is real and that we (humanity) urgently need to take action to avoid catastrophic consequences to all living things on this planet.Why do I choose to promote this view..? Why not express the opposit view..?
It's out there...
I could probably find enough support for it.. What's in it for me..?
What will I gain..?
I could even take the 'in between' position's of: yes, climate change is real but it's hypocritical to do the 'goodie goodie ' thing knowing full well that 'all them foreign bastards' will never join our kumbaya, and will keep on polluting (and making babies)...What's my real motive here...Ok, fair enough, here's what's in it for me:I want an event to rip borders apart for a cause other than greed.I want a reality that will render wealth accumulation totaly useless.I wish for an eye opening event to ridicule existing hierarchy if living species.Why..?Because really I want to rule the world with lot's of money and kebabs.But so do you... (or maybe not you)And I want you to love meAnd I am a grandfather.
So, my dear adversary, over to you.
What's behind your statementsTempted as I may feel, rather than suggest anything, I choose to wait for a "what's in it for me", statement from the other side of this debate.1 -
Radostanradical said:
Lol typical I know you are but what am I playground tactics. I could tear this apart but clearly this is an intellectual mismatch and you are out of your depth.Chippycafc said:
Good too see someone poking their big nose in someone else business and wow I like paragraphs of self assessment coming my way all that does is make me laugh amongst many other things. I suspect you've had those said to you before, a rude and ignorant post and assumption.Radostanradical said:
So we’ve got Mr. “Hardman” over here puffing his chest out with “Whose we and when were you put in charge”. Mate, you sound like a drunk uncle at Christmas who just discovered the caps lock key. “Whose we”? That’s the big power move? Grammar just tapped out and left the building.Chippycafc said:ME14addick said:
We still don't know what it is you think that humans do, that causes climate change. It's quite a simple question.Chippycafc said:
If your that concerned about the environment you could have walked or got an eco bus from where you live. But you didnt as its all fake.cantersaddick said:In case ol' Chipolata is wondering I have taken the train to the valley today as I always do, even though it would have been much quicker and cheaper to drive.
We know that you believe that the increase in the population is the cause, because you agreed with another poster on that, so you must have a reason for believing . We would really like to know.
Whose we and when were you put in charge a very arrogant stance if I must say so. I have answered you 4 times now.
Wonder how many of you tree huggers bothered turning up at the valley yesterday. Clearly some didn't bother to keep their carbon foot print down.
Dont worry we will keep the club going for you.
Then you try to flex with “I have answered you 4 times now.” Congrats, you can count to four. I am actually suprised by that revelation. You’re acting like you’ve been interrogated by the FBI when in reality you’re just recycling the same weak lines in a forum thread.
And oh boy, here comes the killer insult: “tree huggers.” Wow. Cutting edge stuff. Did you dig that out of a 1993 talk radio rant? You’re trying to sound like some rugged outlaw, but let’s be real, if you had to say this face‑to‑face, you’d be sweating through your shirt and praying nobody calls your bluff. Online you’re a lion, in person you’d fold faster than an ironing board.
Finally, the cherry on top: “Don’t worry we will keep the club going for you.” Translation: “Please notice me, I’m desperate to feel important.” You’re not the savior of the valley, mate, you’re just another guy cosplaying behind a keyboard.
Happy for you to come and meet me at any time face to face everyone know's where I am match day. And for noticing me I am not the one posting here all day everyday when I am supposed to be working... Isn't that fraud.
Well you certainly have fitted into your look at me everyone crap I am important with this rubbish.
Whose we.
What on earth are you talking about, working? Fraud? 🤣 no one mentioned that and its a weekend.
My time is far too importang to waste on you, sso will leave it now. You have my permission to carry on though I probably wont bother replying.
You still here rocky.1
