If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Telegraph)   In 40 years, people will flock to the palm-fringed beaches of England   (telegraph.co.uk) divider line 72
    More: Unlikely, shipping route, England, snow removal, Southern Europe, Christopher Robin, Rural Affairs, Met Office, Britain  
•       •       •

4520 clicks; posted to Main » on 28 Jan 2012 at 6:01 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



72 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-01-27 11:44:38 PM
There are already palm trees in the UK.
 
2012-01-28 12:22:28 AM
And we'll grow oranges in Alaska!
 
2012-01-28 12:33:10 AM
These are the kind of dumbass predictions that libs never remember down the road.

I remember the old predictions where much of the current coasts were going to be underwater and/washed away by 2012. and we can all see how that turned out.
 
2012-01-28 12:42:21 AM
It just won't be the Thames
 
2012-01-28 01:42:56 AM
At least they're finally correctly contributing global warming to rising temperatures instead of blaming colder winters and increased snowfall on global WARMING.
 
2012-01-28 01:53:51 AM
allaboutwarmovies.files.wordpress.com
Kubrick did it first.
 
2012-01-28 06:09:52 AM
Just yesterday I was reading a Canadian complain that today it was a balmy 0C, when normally it's 20 below 0 this time of year. Only a Canadian would complain about a problem like that.
 
2012-01-28 06:15:10 AM

MeinRS6: These are the kind of dumbass predictions that libs never remember down the road.

I remember the old predictions where much of the current coasts were going to be underwater and/washed away by 2012. and we can all see how that turned out.


No, these are the kids of predictions scientists facepalm themselves to death about, when you have a functionally illiterate workforce in charge of a newspaper that has no other purpose than to generate cash flow for the stockholders, writing about scientific issues.
 
2012-01-28 06:17:46 AM
I thought global warming was going to melt the Greenland ice sheet killing the gulf stream which warms Europe thereby plunging England and the rest of them into a deep freeze.
 
2012-01-28 06:18:08 AM
This is what Time and Newsweek magazines actually predicted in mid-70's:
mathildasanthropologyblog.files.wordpress.com
LOL
 
2012-01-28 06:19:38 AM

Deathfrogg: kids of predictions

Are they related to the mothers of invention?
 
2012-01-28 06:23:07 AM
Yeah, that change from a 75 F average high to a 76 F average high will really make the palm trees shoot right up...
 
2012-01-28 06:26:43 AM

MeinRS6: These are the kind of dumbass predictions that libs never remember down the road.


Like Karl Rove's "Permanent Republican Majority"
 
2012-01-28 06:36:28 AM
MeinRS6: These are the kind of dumbass predictions that libs never remember down the road.

2wolves: Like Karl Rove's "Permanent Republican Majority"

Well, at least you finally got around to admitting that the global warming panic was a political movement, not a scientific one.
 
2012-01-28 06:40:06 AM

cirby: MeinRS6: These are the kind of dumbass predictions that libs never remember down the road.

2wolves: Like Karl Rove's "Permanent Republican Majority"

Well, at least you finally got around to admitting that the global warming panic was a political movement, not a scientific one.


You must be confusing me with someone else. I rarely enter into a climate change thread except to ask questions.
 
2012-01-28 06:55:24 AM
Back in the late 70s/early 80s, it was global cooling. Oh no! Don't use that hairspray ladies, you are blocking out the sun!!! Supposedly we would have a 'little ice age" by the 2000s...ya, uh huh...scare up some more money asshats.

/Scientists need something to look important about to justify all of those grants
 
2012-01-28 07:03:02 AM

publikenemy: Back in the late 70s/early 80s, it was global cooling. Oh no! Don't use that hairspray ladies, you are blocking out the sun!!! Supposedly we would have a 'little ice age" by the 2000s...ya, uh huh...scare up some more money asshats.

/Scientists need something to look important about to justify all of those grants


Ozone depletion. You may wish to look into it. (new window) Really quite another subject entirely.
 
2012-01-28 07:09:03 AM

2wolves: publikenemy: Back in the late 70s/early 80s, it was global cooling. Oh no! Don't use that hairspray ladies, you are blocking out the sun!!! Supposedly we would have a 'little ice age" by the 2000s...ya, uh huh...scare up some more money asshats.

/Scientists need something to look important about to justify all of those grants

Ozone depletion. You may wish to look into it. (new window) Really quite another subject entirely.


I know about ozone depletion. My point is, it's always something to scare us about.
 
2012-01-28 07:35:01 AM

publikenemy: 2wolves: publikenemy: Back in the late 70s/early 80s, it was global cooling. Oh no! Don't use that hairspray ladies, you are blocking out the sun!!! Supposedly we would have a 'little ice age" by the 2000s...ya, uh huh...scare up some more money asshats.

/Scientists need something to look important about to justify all of those grants

Ozone depletion. You may wish to look into it. (new window) Really quite another subject entirely.

I know about ozone depletion. My point is, it's always something to scare us about.


Yeah, scientists are crazy like that. That's why we don't believe in science. Once you realize they just want to scare you for the grant money, you may as well put science on ignore. Most of their stuff is just theories anyway.
 
2012-01-28 07:53:06 AM

Ablejack:

Yeah, scientists are crazy like that. That's why we don't believe in science. Once you realize they just want to scare you for the grant money, you may as well put science on ignore. Most of their stuff is just theories anyway.


Your naïveté is cute and oddly comforting in this day and age
 
2012-01-28 07:53:56 AM
I remember this sort of thing predicted in Playboy sometime around '75-'77
Still waiting for Brooklyn Palm Trees
 
2012-01-28 07:57:14 AM
In 40 years, people will flock to England for the cuisine and dental care.

As long as we're predicting.
 
2012-01-28 07:59:55 AM
2wolves:
Ozone depletion. You may wish to look into it.

Ah, yes, that was the last huge crisis that could only be solved by expensive international programs.
 
2012-01-28 08:04:42 AM

cirby: 2wolves:
Ozone depletion. You may wish to look into it.

Ah, yes, that was the last huge crisis that could only be solved by expensive international programs.


Getting rid of CFCs was an expensive international program?

Please, tell me more. I'm fascinated.
 
2012-01-28 08:20:38 AM
When we can restart farming in Greenland things will be back to normal...
 
2012-01-28 08:46:33 AM

dryknife: In 40 years, people will flock to England for the cuisine and dental care.

As long as we're predicting.


And gorgeous virginal women.
 
2012-01-28 08:54:30 AM

Twice Banned: dryknife: In 40 years, people will flock to England for the cuisine and dental care.

As long as we're predicting.

And gorgeous virginal women.


Scratch that, it's already coming true. English woman are already becoming hot virgins:


www.stockphotopro.com
 
2012-01-28 09:23:10 AM
But where did they get the coconuts?
 
2012-01-28 10:00:13 AM

gaslight: There are already palm trees in the UK.


Freaked me out when I saw them. You just don't expect it.

For gardeners, read yesterday that the USDA has just released the new plant hardiness zones which reflect the warming climate. You can plug in your zip code and narrow it right down to sub zone.
 
2012-01-28 10:17:49 AM

mark12A: When we can restart farming in Greenland things will be back to normal...


There is farming in Greenland moran.

It didn't work out so well for the Norse back in the day though.
 
2012-01-28 10:28:04 AM

2wolves: publikenemy: Back in the late 70s/early 80s, it was global cooling. Oh no! Don't use that hairspray ladies, you are blocking out the sun!!! Supposedly we would have a 'little ice age" by the 2000s...ya, uh huh...scare up some more money asshats.

/Scientists need something to look important about to justify all of those grants

Ozone depletion. You may wish to look into it. (new window) Really quite another subject entirely.


Yeah they were also saying recently that the ozone depletion was going go lead to massive warming as well, make our minds up as how we are killing us dammit!

Current and jet stream shifts have more to do with warming than anything else, and the earth shifting on its axis. I still love that man is so arrogant to think we can destroy something that's been here for billliyons and billliyons of years.

/obscure on purpose spelling
 
2012-01-28 10:58:50 AM

dryknife: In 40 years, people will flock to England for the cuisine and dental care.

As long as we're predicting.


how do I know you have not been to London whithin the last decade?

/St John FTW
 
2012-01-28 12:22:51 PM
Global warming has already wiped out snow in Britain during the early part of 2000. Poor kids, growing up without snow.

One of the most concerning effects of global warming is the unsustainable growth of hysteria and moronic predictions.
 
2012-01-28 12:26:11 PM

Deathfrogg: MeinRS6: These are the kind of dumbass predictions that libs never remember down the road.

I remember the old predictions where much of the current coasts were going to be underwater and/washed away by 2012. and we can all see how that turned out.

No, these are the kids of predictions scientists facepalm themselves to death about, when you have a functionally illiterate workforce in charge of a newspaper that has no other purpose than to generate cash flow for the stockholders, writing about scientific issues.


They remain fairly silent as long as public hysteria leads to more funds being shifted to climate research.

They only publicly renounce these claims years after the fact when people realize none of that happened.

Yes some people are profiting from misinterpreting results. But the researchers aren't exactly pushing each other down to refute them as long as it works to their benefit.
 
2012-01-28 12:40:40 PM

watson.t.hamster: Deathfrogg: MeinRS6: These are the kind of dumbass predictions that libs never remember down the road.

I remember the old predictions where much of the current coasts were going to be underwater and/washed away by 2012. and we can all see how that turned out.

No, these are the kids of predictions scientists facepalm themselves to death about, when you have a functionally illiterate workforce in charge of a newspaper that has no other purpose than to generate cash flow for the stockholders, writing about scientific issues.

They remain fairly silent as long as public hysteria leads to more funds being shifted to climate research.

They only publicly renounce these claims years after the fact when people realize none of that happened.

Yes some people are profiting from misinterpreting results. But the researchers aren't exactly pushing each other down to refute them as long as it works to their benefit.


So do you have any evidence of this massive fraud?

watson.t.hamster: Global warming has already wiped out snow in Britain during the early part of 2000. Poor kids, growing up without snow.

One of the most concerning effects of global warming is the unsustainable growth of hysteria and moronic predictions.


Yep a journalist writing a moronic article and not something a scientist actually predicted.

Try again.
 
2012-01-28 12:47:11 PM
2wolves:
Getting rid of CFCs was an expensive international program?

Yes, it was, since the standard non-patented CFCs were extremely cheap to make and use, and switching to a "non-depleting" new HFC (which was, also oddly enough, under recent patent protection) was a very costly program.

Then, of course, hundred of millions of old-school CFC-using refrigeration systems that still worked fine had to be phased out in favor of newer systems that worked with the new HFCs.

Adding to the list are many other products, like Halon for fire extinguishers, which still don't have a replacement that works as well, or as cheaply.

Even things like asthma inhalers were affected - the price of inhalers tripled because they couldn't use the safe, inert CFC propellants any more.
 
2012-01-28 12:49:54 PM

Halli: So do you have any evidence of this massive fraud?


Keeping your mouth shut when others misinterpret your results = MASSIVE FRAUD!!!!!!

I'm going to have to disagree with you there.

Yep a journalist writing a moronic article and not something a scientist actually predicted.

Try again.


How exactly does the public dialogue, influencing government policy, about global warming proceed exactly?

Hundreds of millions of people go to scientific conferences and hear the unbiased data? Or through moronic articles like this?

Global warming scientists really need to do a better job refuting these kind of things if they want to be taken seriously. But like I said: as long as the end result is more funding they keep quiet. Only later do they speak up.

Look I know from previous encounters that you're a troll and one of three alts, but do try to think about this rationally before responding. Ok?
 
2012-01-28 12:56:06 PM

cirby: had to be phased out


Key phrase right there.
 
2012-01-28 12:57:26 PM

watson.t.hamster: Keeping your mouth shut when others misinterpret your results = MASSIVE FRAUD!!!!!!

I'm going to have to disagree with you there.


So scientists are to blame for journalists writing stupid stuff about science?

Really?

watson.t.hamster: How exactly does the public dialogue, influencing government policy, about global warming proceed exactly?

Hundreds of millions of people go to scientific conferences and hear the unbiased data? Or through moronic articles like this?


There is plenty of whargarbl in the other direction. Journalists will always write stupid stuff about science.

watson.t.hamster: Global warming scientists really need to do a better job refuting these kind of things if they want to be taken seriously. But like I said: as long as the end result is more funding they keep quiet. Only later do they speak up.


How exactly is their funding impacted by stuff written in newspapers? I would love to see you explain the process.

watson.t.hamster: Look I know from previous encounters that you're a troll and one of three alts, but do try to think about this rationally before responding. Ok?


Que? You have been here for a couple of months trolling the politics tab. Also what are my alts? That should be amusing to hear.
 
2012-01-28 01:06:54 PM

Halli: So scientists are to blame for journalists writing stupid stuff about science?


Never said that. Would you say a crippling inability to understand the written word has helped or hindered you so far in life?

There is plenty of whargarbl in the other direction. Journalists will always write stupid stuff about science.

Both sides are bad. So . . . uh . . . .something.


How exactly is their funding impacted by stuff written in newspapers? I would love to see you explain the process.

Public funds are influenced by (drumroll please!) public opinion. If people could care less about global warming NSF and other government funding agencies would have different research goals (you know they issue statements on which areas are going to receive the most interest and those changed with the last election right?). Why do you think certain kinds of cancer receive such disproportionate levels of funding? Public opinion plays a huge role in how public funds are spent. That's pretty obvious, I shouldn't have to explain this.

Que? You have been here for a couple of months trolling the politics tab. Also what are my alts? That should be amusing to hear.

You remember exactly when I caught you. Don't play dumb. You and Fart_Machine, whidbey all showed up on a mostly dead thread within seconds of each other, posted mostly the same thing then spent the next 15 minutes agreeing with each other. It was pretty sad. You need to pace yourself. Maybe log off and log on as one of those other two for a bit, then give it some time, then come back and agree with yourself. After like an hour or so.
 
2012-01-28 01:15:27 PM

watson.t.hamster: Never said that. Would you say a crippling inability to understand the written word has helped or hindered you so far in life?


You were saying the scientists were to blame for the stupid shiat in the press.

watson.t.hamster: Both sides are bad. So . . . uh . . . .something.


Yes. Both sides are bad in this case.

watson.t.hamster: Public funds are influenced by (drumroll please!) public opinion. If people could care less about global warming NSF and other government funding agencies would have different research goals (you know they issue statements on which areas are going to receive the most interest and those changed with the last election right?). Why do you think certain kinds of cancer receive such disproportionate levels of funding? Public opinion plays a huge role in how public funds are spent. That's pretty obvious, I shouldn't have to explain this.


Nope please explain this. Clearly you must have proof of this.

watson.t.hamster: You remember exactly when I caught you. Don't play dumb. You and Fart_Machine, whidbey all showed up on a mostly dead thread within seconds of each other, posted mostly the same thing then spent the next 15 minutes agreeing with each other. It was pretty sad. You need to pace yourself. Maybe log off and log on as one of those other two for a bit, then give it some time, then come back and agree with yourself. After like an hour or so.


I'm whidbey and Fart_Machine? This may surprise you but I'm not actually in the US. So I would have to spend 24 hours a day to pretend to be those two as well.
 
2012-01-28 01:18:37 PM
The opposite will happen, actually. Without the gulf stream bringing warm water north, France and the UK will be frozen iceballs.
 
2012-01-28 01:22:20 PM
cirby: had to be phased out

2wolves: Key phrase right there.

Yes, it is. Instead of using that "old" CFC-using equipment for years (or decades) longer, it had to be phased out in favor of more expensive, less-efficient new equipment (along with new refrigerants that cost several times as much per unit) that people weren't going to buy unless they were forced to by government intervention.
 
2012-01-28 01:25:08 PM

Halli: watson.t.hamster: Never said that. Would you say a crippling inability to understand the written word has helped or hindered you so far in life?

You were saying the scientists were to blame for the stupid shiat in the press


So hindered, clearly.

(hint: I said they're to blame for not refuting it after it came out, not for printing it in the first place)

Yes. Both sides are bad in this case.

When the side you don't like is wrong then they are wrong. When the side you like is wrong the both are wrong. Too cliche.


Nope please explain this. Clearly you must have proof of this.

I just explained it. This is like someone demanding over and over again that you prove water is wet. Clearly they realize that it is, but are hoping to simply ask the same thing over and over again until you lose interest and they can claim victory. A troll in other words.


I'm whidbey and Fart_Machine? This may surprise you but I'm not actually in the US. So I would have to spend 24 hours a day to pretend to be those two as well.

That's right, the internet shuts down at 9 pm everywhere else. I forgot about that.
 
2012-01-28 01:40:01 PM

watson.t.hamster: So hindered, clearly.

(hint: I said they're to blame for not refuting it after it came out, not for printing it in the first place)


Ahh of course. The journalists aren't to blame. It's the scientists. Got it.

watson.t.hamster: When the side you don't like is wrong then they are wrong. When the side you like is wrong the both are wrong. Too cliche.


Sigh. It's more that scientific writing in newspapers is crap. But whatever you say.

watson.t.hamster: I just explained it. This is like someone demanding over and over again that you prove water is wet. Clearly they realize that it is, but are hoping to simply ask the same thing over and over again until you lose interest and they can claim victory. A troll in other words.


You claim a lot of stuff. You don't ever back it up. Explaining doesn't mean making wild accusations.

watson.t.hamster: That's right, the internet shuts down at 9 pm everywhere else. I forgot about that.


Well there are different timezones and stuff in the world. It might be hard for me to play whidbey who is in the PNW.

Link (new window)

Link (new window)

I just like posting the second one here on fark.

The alt stuff always funny. I remember that kerpal32 idiot calling me an alt before he disappeared in the great troll extinction of 2011. You sure you didn't share his fate back then?
 
2012-01-28 01:55:57 PM

cirby:
Yes, it is. Instead of using that "old" CFC-using equipment for years (or decades) longer, it had to be phased out in favor of more expensive, less-efficient new equipment (along with new refrigerants that cost several times as much per unit) that people weren't going to buy unless they were forced to by government intervention.


If people weren't forced to do things by the government, half the planet would probably be a lifeless cesspool by now. I suppose that would be fine by you--just as long as the gubmint doesn't interfere with your right to pollute and degrade everything to make money. Just as long as you've got yours.
 
2012-01-28 01:56:43 PM

Halli: Ahh of course. The journalists aren't to blame. It's the scientists. Got it.


Right, that's clearly what I said despite never saying that and refuting that exact statement. Troll.

Sigh. It's more that scientific writing in newspapers is crap. But whatever you say.

Unless they agree with you. Like when they say England will turn in to miami within the next few years.

You claim a lot of stuff. You don't ever back it up. Explaining doesn't mean making wild accusations.

Sigh. Compare the trend in federal spending wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com

To the trend of popular acceptance of MMGW.

sas-origin.onstreammedia.com

I know I know, none of that proves water is wet because something something I never provided evidence that it was.

Well there are different timezones and stuff in the world. It might be hard for me to play whidbey who is in the PNW.

Weird then with these timezones (the existence of which somehow proves you aren't at troll) the three of you are able to show up within 30 seconds of each other when you need to agree with one another.


The alt stuff always funny. I remember that kerpal32 idiot calling me an alt before he disappeared in the great troll extinction of 2011. You sure you didn't share his fate back then?

Projection is sad. Not as sad as alt-trolling, but still pretty sad.

Let me know when I have someone show up to basically mimic what I just said and call me a genius within about 30 seconds of posting.
 
2012-01-28 02:12:00 PM

sonofslacker: But where did they get the coconuts?


They were brought north by the swallows.
 
2012-01-28 02:12:12 PM

watson.t.hamster: Right, that's clearly what I said despite never saying that and refuting that exact statement. Troll.


Nope it's what you said.

watson.t.hamster: Sigh. Compare the trend in federal spending wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com

To the trend of popular acceptance of MMGW.

sas-origin.onstreammedia.com

I know I know, none of that proves water is wet because something something I never provided evidence that it was.


You do realize this doesn't help your point? I would think the whole acceptance thing would have to break at least 45% to make the government get in on the funding conspiracy.

watson.t.hamster: Weird then with these timezones (the existence of which somehow proves you aren't at troll) the three of you are able to show up within 30 seconds of each other when you need to agree with one another.


So why aren't my alts showing up in this thread as well?

I like how you ignored those pics.

But seriously when you have only been here for a couple of months try not to call everyone else a troll sweetie.
 
2012-01-28 02:33:24 PM
I live in southern England and have a 15ft palm tree outside my front window.
 
Displayed 50 of 72 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report