Seen this a few days ago, IIRC this is what they are teaching 'primary school' kids nowadays, fcuking disgrace if you ask me, brainwashing is the only way to describe it.

Seven year olds!
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/ne...-31041362.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...-west-31727699

Mistake my ar$e.. Nothing like brainwashing them while they are young.

If you think that's bad, have a look at the Science (Physical World) syllabus:
Gloabl Warming and climate change taught as FACT, NO other theories allowed to be taught.

Even Creationism gets a mention, but not anything to do with debunking the climate change myth.

Yup as said above there's nothing like brainwashing while they are young, for a supposedly democratic country we are actually not that different from North Korea at the end of the day, we are actually taught what to think.

can we have some sources for that

Sure.

Google it..knock yourself out:D

If you're saying it's not a myth then it's obviously a fact, do you have any sources for this?

Science?

So according to you science says that climate change is real?

Science also say's the planets temperature changes with natural cycles. So that pretty much blows you're science theory out of the water.

Please explain why?

So you are admitting climate change is real?

'Admitting'? WTF

I'll go with what the science says.

nice try,

you assert the claim, provide the sources

that's all, quite straight forward really

I really don't understand why so many people struggle with this. The issue isn't with whether or not climate change is real, the issue is whether or not it's influenced by mankinds activities.

He thinks that man made climate change and natural climate variations are mutually exclusive.

It's beyond me how anybody could use this argument against the science? He seems to think that the facts of natural variations of the climate have somehow escaped the entire scientific community.

Science is now 95%+ certain that humans are responsible for recent warming. You'd need to have a bloody set of facts to call it a myth.

Exactly! They know things are changing but they are unsure as to why things are changing, they don't know if the changes are natural or man made.

But yet the powers that be try to convince us it's actually man made and tax us on it.

But people like Martin roll over like faithful little dogs and take they're reaming from the Government with pleasure.

yes it is a funny old world

I saw a poster post on another thread - how he hated it when people ask for sources

I assume he was levelling at me

yet, on the WTC, I am asked to believe stuff, yet the evidence presented to support any claim that posters make is always either blatant lies or a massive misrepresentation of the facts

or people who simply think the are the Messiah

and yet I am the one with the closed mind!!!!!

if you need an example of the importance of sources - watch the following news clip - the climate change denier David Bellamy simply out of his depth and conducting scientific fraud with "bent" sourcedata

PLEASE DO NOT WATCH IF YOU HAVE, OR WANT TO MAINTAIN ANY RESPECT FOR DAVID BELLAMY - it is a bit tragic tbh


the science has been basically settled

please can someone put their sources for the "myths" around the science and climate change

thanks

Monbiot rips Bellamy here quite severely, fair play.

No you are wrong, they do know why it's happening (least 95% sure) that's it's man made. Why is that so difficult for you to comprehend?

yes, as I said in the spoiler alert - if you have any respect for him, you would after that shower of sh1t

pathetic and embarrassing

but all these simple deniers of a "consensus" whether that is climate change, 911 or evolution all use the same tactics

cherry picking data, unreliable and unattributed sources, quote mining (look it up in wiki) and just simple lies

and like creationist and truthers, they simply keep repeating falsehoods and lies

although absolutely happy to accept no science is ever settled, there always room for a better understanding of the world around us, and that the scientist have made errors, in judgement and sometimes exaggeration

In a nutshell... Embarrassing.

I agree.

I know quite staggering

and maybe this is the sort scientist James Delingpole (another anti-knowledge truther) is talking about when he says he does not do science, but is an "interpreter of interpretations" wtf does that even mean


and science should be left to bloggers

LOL just watched this.

SN has plenty of interpreters of interpretations that go by the baseless interpretations, and that's about it. You should know the meaning of it, Hodgy. :D

Well pretty scary that that should be the scientific process according to Delingpole

A load of youtube amateurs posting boll0x, in the same manner I have highlighted in the WTC thread

Still always a few idiots who believe this stuff, after all (climate deniers, truthers, creationist) belief is unconditional on facts/figures or evidence

Absolutely.

Some people are just antagonists and irrationals. They just love to argue, I suppose.