TOM, no one here is denying that mankind has caused ecological disasters in large swaths of the Earth before. We're all well aware of this. The problem at hand is that a group of people wish to exert control over various countries financially. Of course they're not going to come right out and say it, but do the math. Bookwyrm is right on the mark. I don't like when I see litter, or when I go to the beach and see diapers floating around in the ocean. I pick stuff up when I see it. I recycle whenever I can, and I'm sure pretty much everyone else here is as well.

The problem I have is that a group of individuals, hiding behind the UN banner, has decided to mandatorily step in and say "You there, Country X. Check your national sovereignty at the door. You'll cease and desist all production of this type. If you don't you'll be fined this outrageous amount of money. If you want you can retrofit your stuff to reduce air pollution but we're still gonna charge you buku bucks for it and in the meantime your economies, not designed to deal with this, will have crashed, and we'll have accomplished what the Soviets failed to do for so many years before; collapse the free world into financial ruins. And all under the guise of "caring for the environment".

Sorry, not on my watch. This may sound reactionary and even paranoid to some of you but it's the true reality of the situation. And the Climategate email debacle only confirms that the numbers have been intentionally trumped up to make one thing appear to be another. I don't deny that data shows warming and cooling trends, but I do have a beef with the idea that it can be laid squarely around mankind's neck when we simply do not have the data to conclusively support that notion. This could be a natural cycle that the planet is going through for all we know. "The road to hell is paved with good intentions". Keep that quote in mind whenever you see stuff like this on the news at night.

Shadowlander wrote:
The problem at hand is that a group of people wish to exert control over various countries financially.

Ah, I hadn't caught that part about the involvement of Evil Overlords! In that case there are four possible outcomes:

1. Evil Overlords prove to be unbeatable (except by God, of course). World ends.

2. Evil Overlords are beatable but the Heroes wimp out and don't try. World fails to end because it's our room to clean up; no chores, no cookie.

3. Evil Overlords are challenged. Heroes break out the patented "Yankee ingenuity" and invent tech-stuff that solves the problem. Heroes sell the tech-stuff to the whole world (see also: cars, planes, space shuttles, electricity, Three Sisters food crops). Heroes make enough money to not be labeled saps but world can still buy at a reasonable price. Everyone gets tech-stuff, eliminating the intended Evil Overlord monopoly. Problem is solved. Heroes win. Evil Overlords slink away, twirling their mustaches and cackling, "Next time! Next Time! I'll get you, my pretty, and your little dog too!"

4. There are no Evil Overlords, only people who disagree with one and are just as stubborn and/or uninformed as oneself. See also: spouse, Evil Overlord, in-laws.

...

In other words, there always have been people trying to take over the world, or at least as much of it as they can. If one thing doesn't work, they'll just try something else. But we must keep in mind that "even a broken clock tells the truth twice a day." We would do well to look into the theories and claims for ourselves. To ignore the concerns because of the source is like Superman ignoring Lex Luthor's claim that Kryptonite can kill Superman just because those dudes don't like each other.

You know, even the link didn't have "1000+" emails available to read Booky. And that link contained the exact same emails which I've already read and that....erm....certain Climate Change Denying Pundits have jumped upon to "prove" that Global Warming is a hoax.

They do nothing of the sort. And if there were any more conclusive emails among the "1000+" they would all be quoted too. So I'm still reserving judgment on whether or not those emails "prove" that the scientists involved actually faked data. They certainly don't prove that Man Made Climate change is a hoax.

Then you mentioned the possibility that they were faking data for Grant Money. It's possible that is true. But they could have made more money faking data for Oil companies. And you certainly don't see the same Self Serving Pundits jumping all over Oil Scientist data fakery .

Some here have posited that it's all a conspiracy to bring about a New World Order One World Government, or as TOM calls it, The Evil Overlord Theory . Now I am not the sort to call Conspiracy Theorists kooks, because I have a few of my own .

But I do "follow the money" as someone posted earlier. And The Money mostly flows to the coffers of Private Individuals and the Corporations they own. And as long as Conspiracy Theories are temporarily being allowed on Narniaweb, may I posit that it is Corporate Control of ostensibly Representative Democracies that we ought to be concerned about?

I am glad though that most Nwebbers seem to agree that we could be better "Stewards" of the Planet. But as Wagga points out, there is no point in waiting for the Rapture...it could be a long time coming yet. And God could be waiting to see whether or not folk deserve to enter His Realm, and how we look after His planet could make all the difference .

Anyway, I am quite enjoying this more Freewheeling than Usual debate . And I am glad that we are all comfortable enough with each other to have such a pleasant one, and I hope no-one takes offense at any of my commentary .

Peace and Long Life

Gandalf's Beard

I'm not sure why you've chosen to put 1000+ in quotation marks, GB. The number has been widely reported and considering that the emails are on the internet, it would be easy for someone to prove the number is inaccurate. What do you think they're saying in those emails? There's only so many ways you can interpret the first email on that page I linked to which is clearly stating that they are adding to the real temperatures to hide a decline in global temperatures. Why were they passing around emails requesting that emails that could be revealed to the world through a Freedom of Information Act request be deleted? What about the email in which they discuss preventing opposing views from being published in scientific journals? Then there's this little gem I found on another site:

Tim, Chris,

I hope you're not right about the lack of warming lasting till about 2020. I'd rather hoped to see the earlier Met Office press release with Doug's paper that said something like -half the years to 2014 would exceed the warmest year currently on record, 1998!

Still a way to go before 2014.

Nice to see they're actively rooting for the world to get hotter. Oh, and then there's this:

SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.

The UEA’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) was forced to reveal the loss following requests for the data under Freedom of Information legislation.

The data were gathered from weather stations around the world and then adjusted to take account of variables in the way they were collected. The revised figures were kept, but the originals — stored on paper and magnetic tape — were dumped to save space when the CRU moved to a new building.

So rather conveniently we now only have their word that their weather records are accurate. They wouldn't make up data, would they?

How is it that only the people questioning global warming are self-serving pundits? Are you really going to say with a straight face that Al Gore is noble servant of humanity just trying to save us from ourselves? Total coincidence he's making millions off of global warming. Maybe every single one of the reporters, scientists, bloggers, etc. who don't believe in global warming are secretly on the payroll of Big Oil.

I have to disagree with you about Global Warming. There's one funny quirk about Global Warming, it has to be Global. To clarify, the whole world has to all at once, every spot of it, be getting warmer. This is not the case. Some places are getting warmer. That is to true. However, some places are also getting colder. I also want to point out that all the statistics that have been gathered regarding the earths temperature are a small percent of the data. For Pete sake, the earth is probably about 7 thousand years old and we have collected data for how long? Maybe two centuries. So for us to declare that this is truly and unmistakably a Global Warming and that the Earth is coming to an end because it has never been this hot before is absurd. We can't truly say that the Earth has never been this hot before because we are dealing with a small part of the puzzle.

I fully agree with you Watz. El Paso got snow twice last week. I've seen measurable snow in El Paso only twice in the last 10 years. While we may have been seeing a global warming trend, we really don't know enough about the weather to see long term warming/cooling trends. Records highs are being set, but so are record lows. Perhaps these scientists out to live in Colorado in the Spring or Fall when you can get all four seasons in the same day.

Vestigial appendages are not necessarily cast off, they are often adapted to another purpose, such as the gas sacks that helped the fish to swim being adapted to form a secondary respiratory system (i.e. lungs).

A problem with that theory is that you would need several stages of development for the gas sacks to develope into lungs. And they would have to develope similtaneously.
Even if an air passage from the mouth too the gas sacks suddenly mutated in the next generation, it would be useless without the circulatory system altering to take in the oxygen from the new source. Of course these changes would be useless without the gas sacks altering into a multi-chambered air sack at the same time, along with the capillaries intwined with them. Don't forget the diaphram to make it possible to inhale, and exhale.
I Believe the name evolutionists came up for this little miracle is Punctuated Equalibreum.

"Sin of defying God's command of stewardship (if one holds to literal Biblical interpretation). He didn't put the planet here for us to trash.

I think God did a good enough job telling us what is a sin without someone adding some more, thank you.

No, He didn't give it to us to trash. And I personally believe that those who purposly damage His creation are only acting out there own hate for Him. That includes damage to themselves through "personal sin".

Can you show me such a modern textbook using nebraska Man as a proof Puddleglum? I seriously doubt it. That trope has been circulated for years without evidence

Not under that name. But will you deny that the hairy ape man is not depicted anywhere?
Also the horse, and embryo pictures are still used.

Ah, I hadn't caught that part about the involvement of Evil Overlords! In that case there are four possible outcomes:

*chuckles* Now TOM, you must know that's not what I was trying to get across. I think the current world will end someday and a new one will begin, and the "science" (I'm using this word very loosely) behind man-made Global Warming may or may not play a part in this. My point is that the real reason behind this is financial, rather than having actual remedial purposes. The fact is we do not know what the data means...we've only been cataloguing it for the past century or so, thus we can't accurately predict what will happen. I'll be the first to agree that we should care for Creation (and I do my part just like everyone else), but I'm not going to sit here and cede any of my freedoms just because a bunch of disingenuous junk-science vendors are running around and shouting "Fire!" so they can siphon a few hundred billion dollars off of my country.

I find it ironic that GB, who cites Scientific Process at every opportunity, seems to forget that such practices seem to be getting tossed out the window in this case to advance an idea that hasn't been anywhere near as well researched as we're lead to believe.

But I do "follow the money" as someone posted earlier. And The Money mostly flows to the coffers of Private Individuals and the Corporations they own.

What's wrong with a company making money? I mean, this is the underlying reason for starting a company in the first place, yes? You want to talk about highway robbery, that'll be if and when this legislation passes and we end up castrating our economy and handing money to some UN agency to spend on Heaven only knows what. Given their track record and the well documented corruption I can't imagine the money would go to anything beneficial for any of us, that's for sure.

Now, excuse me...I have to go pick up my Big Oil check in the mail now that I've had the chutzpah to actually come to their defense.

Some here have posited that it's all a conspiracy to bring about a New World Order One World Government, or as TOM calls it, The Evil Overlord Theory.

Both of you are taking what I'm saying and elevating it to comedic levels, and I'm not entirely sure why. I'm not one prone to looking for UFO's, checking for Men in Black snooping around my backyard, watching for black helicopters hovering over the neighbor's house, or concerned because of the latest Bilderberger meeting in Brussels. What I'm talking about is an orchestrated attempt by and outside group hiding in the shadow of the UN to grab some cash while hiding under the auspices of trying to "help the environment".

And TOM, I know full well that God is in control but that doesn't cut me slack to just stand idly by while the whole world crashes down around us because of what I'm strongly perceiving to be a pretended catastrophe. If there's any reason for atmospheric changes and global warming or cooling trends I would say that the Flood had more to do with it than some tire factory in Gary, Indiana. Something had to have happened to the atmosphere then because rainbows were apparently not possible until afterwards, and that's something in and of itself. And if Scripture is correct then we can make a reasonable assumption that this event occurred only a few millenia ago and may still be having some climatic effect on us still. I know that concept will appear to be even more outlandish to some of the members here, but it's in the Bible, so let's give it its due.

The Flood most certainly has done a lot to the earth. Just look at the lifespans before and after. You go from 900 to 100 in just a few generations. Something happened that caused this. The Flood explains so much about the damage, the features we see on earth, the climate, the Ice Age, the list goes on. It still is the only via answer to the combination of fossils, oil, and the sudden lack of creatures. Another example of how conditions were better prior to the Flood is the nostrils of a brontosaurus. They are the size of a horse's. How could such a creature breathe in our current climate? We humans have a hard enough time breathing as is, especially when we get to higher altitudes. But a creature that could crush us with one step and not notice? That requires a lot of air. This is part of what has lead to the belief that prior to the Flood, there was a lot more oxygen in the air and a lot higher air pressure.

Such situations have been demonstrated by hyperbaric chambers. I've heard of what happens in those things. Wound are healed at a near miraculous rate. Growth magnifies. And endurance is much higher. These type of setting would explain why we currently have teeth problems, why we have found human bones that would project to be about 12 feet tall and size 56 shoe. If our jaws were bigger, all 32 teeth would fit just fine and there would be no need to remove wisdom teeth (as many of us have had to painfully endure). This type of setting would also be ideal conditions for dinosaurs and a wide variety of creatures that we hardly even know about. And the Flood wrecked it all.

But could a world wide Flood do all this? We have seen a single mega-eruption (like the feared second coming an Anut-Krakatao) of volcanoes can have devistating world-wide effects (like the first Krakatao eruption did, issuing alone a mini-Ice Age). Imagine an world-wide earthquake that broke the foundations of the deep (and I have good reason to suspect that tectonic plate lines are where those took place) and all the oceanic water flowing onto the earth's surface all at once. We know where the Flood waters resided to. It covers 70% of our planet. And after seeing what the 2004 Tsunami did, imagine so much more all over the planet. Water is the 2nd most powerful force on the earth after fire. A world-wide Flood can not only destroy the feature of the earth, it could competely mess up the climate. I'd say more, but I need to go to bed before my last Final tomorrow morning.

Both of you are taking what I'm saying and elevating it to comedic levels, and I'm not entirely sure why. I'm not one prone to looking for UFO's, checking for Men in Black snooping around my backyard, watching for black helicopters hovering over the neighbor's house, or concerned because of the latest Bilderberger meeting in Brussels. What I'm talking about is an orchestrated attempt by and outside group hiding in the shadow of the UN to grab some cash while hiding under the auspices of trying to "help the environment".

I don't think it's you they were referring to, but the people who DO believe that any kind of international cooperation on any kind of issue will inevitably lead to an Evil!New World Order, in which they will invariably be persecuted for their beliefs. There are people who sincerely believe the Copenhagen meeting that is soon to take place is synonymous with the Bildergerger meetings in terms of a "hidden agenda" of world domination and restricting freedoms.

Of course there are groups and corporations hiding in every kind of shadow, all trying to get in on the cash flow. Does that mean that we should discredit any and all evidence that our activities adversely affect the world? Like anything, it's only the loudest and most radical who are ever heard, and the more reasonable opinions are covered up and lost in the diatribe between the Totally Right and Totally Wrong camps. We actually staged this debate in my natural resources class a few weeks ago. The team arguing against man-made warming stated that the dinosaur era had 5% more CO2 than we do now....but failed to remember that the climate was much warmer then as well. The "bad science" exists on both sides, not just the side of those who claim it's happening, and they each like to see who can throw the biggest, most impressive numbers at the public. Just because the evidence for global warming is debatable doesn't mean we aren't affecting other areas with our current lifestyle.

If environmentally friendlier methods of industry and energy are made a reality, I don't see how that will result in anyone losing any freedoms already granted to them. You will still be able to turn up your thermostat as high as you like, it will just be run by something else. Of course, transitioning into a new system is always accompanied by a time of serious upheaval as things shift, but that is unavoidable. On the other hand, you won't be able to turn up your thermostat as high as you wish when the natural gas/coal/oil shortage actually gets underway. How will that resource be rationed then? Perhaps like sugar and nylons in WWII with ration stamps? Or maybe a temperature and time limit will be instituted, with periods of enforced shut down, like bomb drills and blackouts during the Cold War? Loss of these small choices is far more likely without a shift to more renewable sources, since as supplies dwindle, there are two choices: let the prices skyrocket and deal with the subsequent social discord or let the government step in to attempt to keep the status quo by whatever means. (There is always that third option of just letting things devolve into total anarchy...which some people are also predicting and rather looking forward too )

In America especially there is a subtle (and sometimes not so subtle) paranoia of anything resembling giving up a bit of personal gain for the good of the community at large. I find this really ironic, considering that this country was built on the strength of the community to band together, first in the colonies and later during the Westward expansion, and even up through the Great Depression. Like most social problems, greed is at the base of it. Everyone is so worried about getting their personal share and making sure their personal freedoms aren't getting hurt that it's a bit like the Dwarves in LB...all squabbling with each other about who is getting the best bits of the feast, and complaining that it's all not good enough anyway.

We humans have a hard enough time breathing as is, especially when we get to higher altitudes. But a creature that could crush us with one step and not notice? That requires a lot of air. This is part of what has lead to the belief that prior to the Flood, there was a lot more oxygen in the air and a lot higher air pressure.

This reminds me a bit of a theory Arthur C. Clarke used in his stories about how the people who spent a great deal of time in space travel and on the Moon base lived much longer due to the lower gravity putting less stress on their bodies. A bit off, I know, but that's what it made me think of.

Shadow, you left out a very important part of my quote, so here's the whole thing:

ME:
Some here have posited that it's all a conspiracy to bring about a New World Order One World Government, or as TOM calls it, The Evil Overlord Theory . Now I am not the sort to call Conspiracy Theorists kooks, because I have a few of my own .

So I wasn't mocking you, I was laughing at TOM's humourous response to your post. I've been doing a lot of ruminating on the various possibilities, and I cannot deny that there might be some seriously shady stuff going on just out of sight. We may only be seeing the tip of the (melting ) Iceberg.

Okay,.....after some careful consideration I've come up with a new Conspiracy Theory, the only one that can reconcile the unnecessary fudging of scientific data when it's perfectly obvious that the Ice Caps and Greenland are melting.

No, wait...hear me out...it's a diabolically clever scheme to play both sides against each other, kind of like Chancellor/Emperor Palpatine backing both the Separatists and the Galactic Republic to gain power for himself .

First, this Cabal of Elites that owns the Majority Shares of the Corporations and the Banks buys most of the politicians, and for 150 years have been polluting at will and plundering the planet's resources and labour, but it's not enough. They want the whole Shebang. So through their politicians they create the UN, the First Step to a One World Government that serves at the will of these elites. They fund and co-opt Socialist Revolutions. Then they keep a Cold War going for 40 years that keeps the masses divided and conquered.

When that finally collapses, the Elites need a new program to maintain their hegemony. So they secretly jump on the Global Warming Bandwagon, but many politicians from different countries aren't moving fast enough to The New World Order. So these elites bribe hundreds of scientists to cook the books making Global Warming look like it's happening faster than it really is, because only a Global Crisis can convince people to give up their freedom in the name of security.

Brave Blogger Hackers stumble onto this Nefarious Plan and blow it wide open. But it doesn't really make a difference because these Elites will win either way. They can simply pin the whole "Hoax" on Greedy Mad Scientists and leave them holding the bag.

Meanwhile politicians who were on the fence will now allow the Elites to run the Corporations and Socialist Regimes the way they see fit. One World Government gets pushed onto the back-burner again because as long as the Elites can do what they want without interference they are still in the Driver's Seat and they can bide their time .

Pollution and Global Warming can now continue unabated, but no-one will believe the few Good Scientists who continue to sound the alarm. Al Gore grows his beard back again and goes into hiding on a farm in Canada or France .

Okay...So I haven't worked out all the details . But it would explain a lot. And it manages to combine Left and Right Conspiracy Theories into one. So in a way, both sides may have part of the truth. But without the whole puzzle put together we keep fighting each other instead of these Elites who are laughing all the way to the Federal Reserve .

I know, I know...you're thinking "Poor old GB! He's finally cracked from the strain ". But in all seriousness, what else have I got? I must try to make some logical sense out of the mess. And my new Theory (alright, more like a Hypothesis) is the best one I can come up with for the time being which fits the available facts .

Live Long and Prosper

Gandalf's Beard

EDIT: By the way, kudos to Draugrin and Wagga and anyone else I have missed who has pointed out that despite the Ruling Elites and Fudged Data, we cannot stand by and let them lead us to Desolation.

One problem with your theory GB. You don't even mention the Greys, there's no cattle mutilations, and you're still left with those 12 "missing" days.

Hey, I'm trying to be Realistic here!

GB

Aragh! How do you (pl) find time to write so much? I can’t even keep up reading it let alone write anything! I never had the time Fencer apparently has during finals. Anyway, I know we are pages beyond it now but since I took the time to type them up here are some of my thoughts on Merry Christmas vs. Happy Holidays. I started this post when it was more relevant to the discussion at hand and had meant to add to which is why I didn’t post it sooner.
Those rats, how dare they take a Christian holiday and a bishop (Saint Nikolas) and turn it into something else, something nonreligious. Oh wait, that's the sort of thing that the Christians have done. (The previous was meant to be funny. If it wasn’t I apologize.)
As others have said, the Christians took pagan holidays and traditions and redirected them to be Christian holidays. One of my teachers said about the changing of the Saturn festival something along the lines of as long as they got celebrate it was easy to switch the focus. This makes me think of what one of the apostles did when he talked about the altar to the unknown God and then told them that this unknown God was the true God. Going back to changing traditions and holidays, since Christians originally changed pagan celebrations, it seems fair to expect that some group would try to change them. However, as that satire points out things are not as bad as they could be. Is Christmas too commercial? Absolutely. Stores start selling things to early and focus on the Santa aspect. This year, because of this discussion, I paid special attention to items in the store. The majority of the items focus on the secular aspect of Christmas. I wanted to find gift bags or wrapping paper with a religious them to wrap the Christmas ornaments my sister and I give to the students in our Sunday school class (we make the Christmons (ornaments that symbolize something about Christ)). I could not find anything premade. I found one set of religious stickers and my mom and my sister found stamps we can use to decorate bags. However, this year I finally found nativity scene cookie cutters! I’ve been looking for years. Christmas (at least in the US) has really gotten out of hand. Here I have to apologize in advance to Shadowlander: I know how much you love those inflatable Christmas decorations, but I feel that I just have to say how I feel about them, so please don’t take it as a personal insult. There are a few houses in the town where I live that go overboard with tacky Christmas decorations. The past few years inflatable Christmas decorations have become increasingly popular over the last few years. Shaped balloons are nice in the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade, but I don’t need to see their smaller (but by no means small) cousins parked in people’s yards. This year a store was advertising three inflatable Christmas decorations: a gorilla, a zebra, and a hippo. Nothing says Christmas like those animals. Although Christmas is largely out of hand, it is not completely lost. Christmas Eve services are still packed and houses still have nativity scenes in their yards. A Charlie Brown Christmas remains a favorite with its message against commercialism and for Christ (Linus quotes scripture to show what the true meaning is and Charlie Brown protests the commercialization / selfish side of Christmas). I think it is funny that we complain about commercialism now, but A Charlie Brown Christmas has a strong anti-commercialism message and it was made in the ‘60s (If I’m remembering correctly). Each person can still choose how celebrate Christmas. In my family, the focus has always been on Jesus. Sure, we have some Santa decoration and other non religious decorations, but the Advent Wreath and devotional time have always been far more important than the other aspects of Christmas. Our family doesn’t believe in Santa, so as children my sister and I didn’t have that as a distraction at Christmas time.
Merry Christmas could be used more. I was looking at a box of “holiday” Goldfish crackers. It said Happy Holiday although the crackers were stockings and trees which are clearly Christmas. In that case, I think “Merry Christmas” would be more appropriate. The hard thing about “Happy Holidays” is that it is hard to tell if it is done just as political correct alternative (We have to say this so we don’t offend anyone), or to include New Year’s Eve. Certain times it would be more appropriate to say “Merry Christmas.” At least they haven’t changed the name of the holiday to Clausday or something like that. It is still Christmas (Christ Mass).

Ah, I hadn't caught that part about the involvement of Evil Overlords!

The trouble is though with evil overlords is that they very seldom openly admit to being evil overlords. Far from it, they are usually pushing some agenda or other, which might on the surface look perfectly reasonable to a lot of people. And I do agree that data gets fudged and facts ignored to fit pet theories and beliefs. That, after all, is what so-called "creationism" is about, and why the scientific world gets annoyed with those who want to push it.

Why were they passing around emails requesting that emails that could be revealed to the world through a Freedom of Information Act request be deleted? What about the email in which they discuss preventing opposing views from being published in scientific journals?

If it is really true that data was suppressed fraudulently, then there doubtless will be an enquiry, heads will roll, reputations will be forever tarnished, and the press will have a field day. The case for getting the world to clean up its act will be weakened and self-interest oil pushers with their own religious explanations for future disasters will be happily blaming 'the Great Satan' a bit more for its immoral behaviour.

However, emails never just disappear, nor will the data that is being kept quiet. Who compiled it, from what source, and from where in the world? Wouldn't the compilers have copies of information sent to scientists in East Anglia? I know enough about computers that investigators are quite capable of resurrecting 'deleted material', in case of crime. And I am somewhat surprised that those who insist the world is in fact getting cooler never seem to quote their sources of information, either, merely the cost to themselves at the mention of a tax to help poorer countries clean up their act as well. Ice cores from the Antarctic, which have proven this is an unprecedented hot era? Tree rings? And why are we having so many El Nino events, anyway? How is it that we had such a warm spring that a wheat crop has already had to be harvested, as early as November?

We've been told all along that weather overall might become more extreme, not that some winters won't be cold or even colder. Don't you expect to have white Christmases up there on the North side? Or is Bing Crosby's crooning Christmas carol not only irritating to us Down Under, but not factually true either?

Now I know that mathematical calculations leave me cold, as they do most people. A long mathematical formula which explains the Big Bang might be true. But 'Let there be light' cuts to the nitty gritty. You could say it is 'Keeping it Simple Stupid'! Maybe in collating and presenting their data, the scientists need to do the same thing. When telling you to tidy your room, does your Mum tell you in great detail, that yes, your room is messy, but that it was less messy than expected, that it is tidier than it was three months ago, that you left 3 fewer items on the floor to pick up or that the neighbours actually think you are tidier than their messy children?

Of course not! She yells at you, and exaggerates your messiness to get your attention. I hope you don't start muttering 'evil overlord', or dream up dastardly conspiracy theories to explain her suppression of some data.

What's wrong with a company making money? I mean, this is the underlying reason for starting a company in the first place, yes? You want to talk about highway robbery, that'll be if and when this legislation passes and we end up castrating our economy and handing money to some UN agency to spend on Heaven only knows what

Nothing wrong with making money, so long as it is done legally, the goods and services supplied do what they claim they do, are not harmful in any way, are not defective in some way, without unintended drawbacks going uninvestigated, and so long as the company pays more than lip service to 'Duty of Care', in its processes, administration and treatment of all employees, not merely the CEO's enormous salary. Did I hear someone mention Al Gore, who said himself, his people were tobacco farmers?

Some of the legalities involved in companies include:

Company law, corporations law, trade practices, consumer protection, employment law, occupational health and safety law, etc.

On the other hand, I doubt the UN has been as impartial a world body as it ought to have been.