Is anyone curious about this snowy weather?

[shobet]

And there was me thinking it was all to do with baby Jesus. I have had half a gallon of gin so it may be the spirit talking. 

[dave_mc]

hehe, i'll keep an eye out for them.

[AndyR]

And you might want to watch Mama Mia as well. My wife, to her utter surprise, has grudgingly come to appreciate the Alien films, but she feels that Mama Mia is more true to life...

(I, on the other hand, although I do not have involuntary retching spasms when I have to watch it, unlike other manly males I know, would advise you to watch it in secret the first time, just in case you come out in a rash or something...)

[Johnny Mac]

I thought Dave Mc was Fozzy Bear!  :lol:

is that a compliment or an insult? :lol:

On, on the general topic of scientific misrepresentation and birbary for carreer furtherence - yeah, some try it, but dont forget peer review!

Any given scientist in any given field can try to falsify or twist results, and when they release their findings all the other scientists in the field will tar and feather him for it precisely because competition is fierce, and its about the only area where intellectual dishonesty is a disqualifier, rather than a carreer booster.

Oh shiteeeee, see what I've done there - joined this thread....uh oh.

word

how come you don't get jumped on when you make statements like that? :( if i'd said that (and I think i probably did, somewhere) i'd get accused of being part of the conspiracy...

and I haven't seen any of the films you're discussing (well, except lethal weapon). I think it's a conspiracy to keep me out of the thread :lol:

I dunno. Maybe people are too burned out on the topic to try to argue.

More importantly

Alien
Aliens
Alien 3
Alien ressurection
Predator
Predator 2
Alien Vs Predator
Alien Vs Predator requiem

Wide range of goodness in them, from outstanding to shiteee, but you MUST WATCH THEM. The ones that are cr@p are still great fun.

All the conspiracies, you'd have to be Mr Weyland :P

I'd say burke, but he was a scumbag, Weyland at least meant well, before he got skewered.

I love the film Alien. I thought it was the best one, the suspense was brilliant.  Aliens that was an 80's film wasn't it? I did watch it when it was released on VHS. I do remember that character now I've seen the you tube clip.
Alien resurrection is that one with the giant hybrid Alien isn't it?. Not so good! The others were a bit of fun. 

[MDV]

I thought Dave Mc was Fozzy Bear!  :lol:

is that a compliment or an insult? :lol:

On, on the general topic of scientific misrepresentation and birbary for carreer furtherence - yeah, some try it, but dont forget peer review!

Any given scientist in any given field can try to falsify or twist results, and when they release their findings all the other scientists in the field will tar and feather him for it precisely because competition is fierce, and its about the only area where intellectual dishonesty is a disqualifier, rather than a carreer booster.

Oh shiteeeeee, see what I've done there - joined this thread....uh oh.

word

how come you don't get jumped on when you make statements like that? :( if i'd said that (and I think i probably did, somewhere) i'd get accused of being part of the conspiracy...

and I haven't seen any of the films you're discussing (well, except lethal weapon). I think it's a conspiracy to keep me out of the thread :lol:

I dunno. Maybe people are too burned out on the topic to try to argue.

More importantly

Alien
Aliens
Alien 3
Alien ressurection
Predator
Predator 2
Alien Vs Predator
Alien Vs Predator requiem

Wide range of goodness in them, from outstanding to shiteeee, but you MUST WATCH THEM. The ones that are cr@p are still great fun.

All the conspiracies, you'd have to be Mr Weyland :P

I'd say burke, but he was a scumbag, Weyland at least meant well, before he got skewered.

I love the film Alien. I thought it was the best one, the suspense was brilliant.  Aliens that was an 80's film wasn't it? I did watch it when it was released on VHS. I do remember that character now I've seen the you tube clip.
Alien resurrection is that one with the giant hybrid Alien isn't it?. Not so good! The others were a bit of fun. 

Yeah, it tails off heavily after alien and aliens. I think they're similarly (very!) good films, but different. Alien 3 is a perfectly decent film, but it had misfortune of following the first 2, which are crackers. Ressurection is indeed shite, but enjoyable if one takes it for what it is - dumb action film executed with a level of skill appropriate to 'forgettable summer blockbuster' rather than 'cinematic legend'.

The predator films are what they are, at the end of the day - when the chips are down they're also dumb action films with a tad more charsima than most, y'know what I mean?

Sorry, some cross thread contamination there.

The AVP films are just cash-ins and a good laugh. I love them partly because they're bad - the plots are nothing but excuses to have aliens fight predators with some people getting in the way. In a similar sort of way to transformers being an excuse to have giant robots fighting, and pretty much nothing more.

[Ratrod]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7000063.ece

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6999051.ece

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6991177.ece

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article6999815.ece

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6999975.ece

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1245636/Glacier-scientists-says-knew-data-verified.html#

[Afghan Dave]

Thanks for the links above but I fear you're banging your head against a brick wall.

[Ratrod]

[Afghan Dave]

"Scientists exaggerated impact of climate change, says Government's chief adviser"

“I don’t think it’s healthy to dismiss proper scepticism. Science grows and improves in the light of criticism"

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7003622.ece

[Jonny]

Christ I must admit I haven't been following this thread after what Dave said to me but 14 $%&#ing pages? That's a record for me :P

[Ratrod]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/7111525/UN-climate-change-panel-based-claims-on-student-dissertation-and-magazine-article.html

[dave_mc]

jeez, this is still going? I've had a bad cold all week, if you really want i can see what i can do (i would add that i read the mail on sunday article yesterday about the UN guy who isn't actually a climate scientist and that's pretty worrying, but again i consider political bodies such as the UN as separate to scientists at university) in a couple of days as regards debating your points (assuming i don't agree), but i really can't be bothered right now... :)

[Ratrod]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/feb/01/dispute-weather-fraud

This one is in Dutch. It only concerns Holland. Use a translator. http://www.vn.nl/Archief/Wetenschapmilieu/Artikel-Wetenschapmilieu/Nieuwe-fout-klimaatpanel-ontdekt.htm

In short IPCC claims: 55% of Holland is below sea level and it produces 65% of the GNP.

The facts: 20% of Holland is below sea level and only 19% of the GNP is produced there. Plus the chances of flooding are exadurated.

[Afghan Dave]

I just hope this stink gives people pause for thought before believeing everything published should be acted on because "time is running out"....

Good honest science takes time and sh1t like this gets exposed in the end.

As I said - Time pressure / panic hides the truth and is a classic manipulation technique.

Give it time and the truth will emerge.

[dave_mc]

yeah, i read yesterday's guardian (and the previous day's- i think the one you linked to was from a couple of days ago; the article from yesterday's guardian, by the same writer, was arguably even more damning). It's not looking great. I'd still say that most of the science still backs up GW/CC, but I'm not going to defend things which were obviously wrong (as someone who is sympathetic to science I don't exactly want to be lied to either, as apart from anything it'll make me question my sympathies). Also some of the stuff the IPCC quoted was fairly dodgy... a WWF report or something? :lol:

I would also point out that, in the same article you linked to (at least, it was on the same page as the article in the print version of the guardian which i read), there was a list of misinformation which was being put around by CC sceptics, too.