Second Referendum

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Badly handled is an understatement imo, a big one.

In saying that I know little of this matter, my Spanish political history knowledge ends at the end of the Spanish civil war
 
If Rajoy had authorised the referendum it is very possible that vote would have gone in favour of remaining as part of Spain. In most other regions of Spain the Catalans are not liked as they are seen as greedy, wanting from central government than other regions. The number of Spanish flags flying from peoples houses trebled in our area as people showed their support . It was probably the only time that Rajoy has had substantial popular support.


True. Most of the people here have very little time for them. They’re considered arrogant and aloof.
 
Case in point, lets test this.

If I told you I could predict the weather 6 month ahead. (testable theory) and 6 months later, I got it wrong completely(Met Office bbq summers :) ) Would you believe me if I said "well, I cant predict the weather 6 months ahead but I can predict it 82 years ahead" What would you say to that claim?

I think that is a fair question
Nobody is saying that they can predict the weather in2100. They are talking about probable climate change by 2100. Weather is not climate.
 
Forget in anyways mate, didn't want to end up on this topic, I didn't bring it up. <laugh>

Remoaners have more immediate concerns, like overturning democratic vote outcomes they don't like. [HASHTAG]#postmodernists[/HASHTAG] [HASHTAG]#socialconstructionists[/HASHTAG] [HASHTAG]#socialistcrackpots[/HASHTAG]


Surprised the Brexit vote has not been blamed on Putin yet tbh
 
You seem to be emotionally invested in your argument.

1 You did not actually deal with my point, you argued against it with a poor argument, ie people who are at the extreme end of poverty are fighting to feed themselves and their kids. Your post reply didn't address that. Clearly, read it.
2 I never mentioned "an indian farmer" I mentioned the farmer (collective, generic) who's farm failed because of various possible reasons ) and that his priority above all else is feeding his kids and family. Your reply did not respond to this explicitly
3 (Most would) is not an argument of substance
4 Monsoon has always fluctuated, and it is weather, and the cause, but I accept your other points made on this one, fair shout
5 "Villages tend to spring up close to water sources" You've never been to Africa have you, I have. You are wrong here. Water sources can be close and utterly undrinkable, villages cant just pack up and move to a river, do you think they have vans and trailers?
6 Satellite data and precipitation data show that CO2 has increased green plant life. Furthermore, more readily available CO2 increases plant drought resistance (plants with more CO2 need less water)
7 I take that on board, I just did a quick read, if you want I can provide some WHO sources, UN sources?

Your first post claimed environmentalism is a luxury of the wealthy, however after I responded you shifted it to it to claim environmentalism is ignored by the destitute. Yet you claim my argument is poor, it is fairly obvious that we are going to agree that those in abject starvation can only think of their next meal.

1 & 2. Your first point was :
'Do you think the Indian farmer struggling to feed his kids is an environmentalist?'
Who said his farm had failed? Clearly if it had then it would be a stretch to call him a farmer. I read it and not your attempt at revisionism.
5. I lived with Beduins in the sinai for a couple of weeks and have visited several north african countries. I highlighted the reasons why a local water source may no longer be drinkable.
6. I have studied the production of RuBisCo and how it impacts on growth due to the energy required to produce it. It's a double edge sword, increased CO2, increases nutrient uptake and also uses more water because there is more growth. Failure to meet the additional needs particularly in macro nutrients (Phosphate, Nitrate, potassium ) and iron will destroy the soil for farming very quickly. As I have shown the story on the ground is one of reducing soil quality, increased deforestation, leading to increased erosion. Countries affected are being pro-active to halt this.

The data you are using regarding CO2 being the cause of recent greening when compared to 70s and 80's is as far as I can tell from this
https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate2664
however this is disputed by later research which is described here
https://www.carbonbrief.org/sahel-rainfall-recovery-linked-to-warming-mediterranean-study-says

Global warming due to rising CO2 is another matter, if areas suffer prolonged periods over 40c then it kills soil bacteria which means the end of growing crops refardless of extra CO2.
 
"here read this" is what millions of internet ranters do, most of whom never read the links they post
 
  • Like
Reactions: DMD
Lets not say things we cant take back. <laugh>

I think I am done, it is not fun any more since the eco loon showed up

You gave me a ****ing good laugh <applause> you are the master supreme but now maybe time to close the...

You must log in or register to see images
 
  • Like
Reactions: Angry_Physics
You gave me a ****ing good laugh <applause> you are the master supreme but now maybe time to close the...

You must log in or register to see images


<laugh>

Are you brexiting this thread ? Aber warum? ich verspreche, ein guter Deutscher zu sein mein schätzchen