thewelsho

Excellent!

ha! very clever

Just a shame you didn't have a quality DSLR for this, fitted with a graduated filter to tone-down the over-exposure of the sand at the back and to give the sky a nice deep blue look. Nice forground textures in the sand and tracks which would have jumped out with a lower sun to really show up the textures. The tracks lead the viewer's eye into the picture to that nicely lit sand dune and blue sky at the back, very nice composition, I really like it!

Nice choice of machine to make the jump with

Could have fooled me. BBC news is awash with the Copenhagen crap with presenters forcasting all manner of gloom and doom if action is not taken. Any breakthrough of a turnaround from this nonsense is surely dead in the water I thought Partillo and the presenter guy in particular, put up a very damning arguement against the one who called us all idiots (and a very ugly presenter he was too. If he had argued that ugliness was a symptom of AGW, he would have gotten my vote for sure). What is Cohen all about? Where does he get off calling people idiots simply because they disagree with his point of view? Ph D standard scientists and Nobel proze winners are idiots because, because well, some ugly journo said so. Go back under your rock mate and give us all peace!

Hahaha! Nice one!

Jeez man you have the best of about ten worlds! Seafar99 going all NewAge on us! Ha! Who'd have thunk it

Really can't argue with that, defo worthwhile to count our blessings and its worth dwelling on the positive, rather than the negative.

Ha! As soon as I posted the question, the thought "Original Poster" actaully sprang to mind But thanks for the confirmation

What's an OP???

Also the rather nice tones of the stonework and threatening sky, cool

As Barry said, get a second opinion re. disk replacement. Dealers (apparently) will tell you they will need replaced with there is mucho life left in them. Changing the front disks and pads is a skoosh. I'm a complete tit with cars and I managed it at the first attempt, so you should manage it blindfolded.

To the contrary, I enjoyed reading your last, lengthy post. Its not so much one dating method or the other, its dating methodology period. People don't realise that, regardless of the dating method in question, supposition plays a big part. And where there is supposition, there is no certainty. Also, Plimer recounts climate history with such startling detail, going back millions of years... how is this possible unless one is there to witness such??? How can he, on the one hand give such scathing dissproval of climate models based on guess-work etc. but on the other hand, "prove" geological climate change with such certainty using a different set of guesses? Given the wide range of references that he has read and quoted, it would appear that there is a consensus among geolgists at least, of these climate-swings in the distant past. Which means, geologists who are pro-AGW are ignoring data from their own field. So whether the science is right or wrong, makes no difference, as all (generally speaking) parties accept said data. Nevertheless, his climate-change information/history for recent times, for which there are witness records, habits, migrations etc. etc. is compelling reading, at least in my tiny mind. Mr. Plimer's book has, for the present at least, given way to a photoghraphy book! I'll get back to it though A word about Andy's post: As Dale said "sad, but true". There is nothing we really can do. For me, this is more frustrating than having this AGW racket forced down my throat. I couldn't agree more regarding your assessment of government (all parties, all countries). As I have said in other places: "Democracy... an illusion". Apologies, that was a bit off-top.

Yup, my thoughts too.

Look, AGW is NOT caused by humans, bottom line, therefore, the reason for this thread. However, no one is going to argue with you when you say that we should be less destructive (rainforests etc.) and no one is will argue that we should be less wasteful. However, joining up the two with AGW is where you will meet disagreement. Green Taxing is nothing more than a means of ripping us off and that is why people are getting a bit irrate to say the least.

Ian Plimer in his book, Heaven and Earth, goes to great lengths to show that humans actually prosper in periods of global warming. The latest thing being touted by Radio 5 Live: short haul flights are to become a thing of the past because of CO2 Emissions. In future trips to the south of France etc. will be managed by fast speed rail links (dream on). Fast link or otherwise, a trip on the train is a journey back to the Dark Ages.

Precisely. You'd think that he'd come up with is own assessment of the dissesnters instead of recycling the tacky insults from the AGW camp. Doesn't he realise, that among the voices of the dissenters, are people who are as highly, if not, more highly qualified that those who profess AGW? What an absolute tw@t tw@at and double tw@t. Strange thing: Bearing in mind, we have fools speaking through the (even more foolish) media, telling us that we should be using only one sheet of lavvy roll etc., YET, no one, not a single one, has spoken out against the increasingly popular use of Christmas lights. With every passing year, we get more and more like the States, where people completely cover their homes in lights. Take that, agasint the backdrop of the banning of standard light bulbs becasue they use too much energy, and you wouldn't be surprised if the death penatly were re-introduced for such a henious crime! Do you think, that such goes unmentioned becasue the backlash from the public would be so great as to threaten the AGW religion?

Also heard on Radio 5 Live some commentaror (woman) stating that reproduction (having kids) is enviromentally irresponsible. On the same station (going back a bit) was another stupid cow going on about how we should use only ONE sheet of lavvy role per visit. No wonder Neil is getting frustrated and worried. Why are these people even allowed to breathe let alone be allowed onto a reputable mainstream news station in order to promote this tripe! As per usual, the thick-as-s**** British public support all this PC crap by turning up to mass demonstrations demanding that world-powers do something about it at Copenhagen. If they actually put together their individual brain cell the might actually see that they are the ones who will have to pay the price and are thus, metaphorically, being screwed over a barrell. Makes me very angry indeed!

Dunc at Hypertech will sort you out with fitting and alignment. Couple of hours max

Well, much of the I'm reading in his book at the moment, is brain damage. Chapter 1, Introduction, was pretty good and would have been sufficient for my purpose. Much of the material that he mentions, I have heard from other sources, so it cements some of the things I have already read. The next chapter on History is murder. He gives a very detailed and complex account of historical climate-change from millions of years ago to present times. However, how can anyone, who wasn't there all those millions of years ago (I'm not convinced we have been here that long anyway) possibly recount these changes with such accuracy? Reading it, is like wading through porridge, but the gist of the chapter is worthwhile. Anyway, I'll pursue it for another bit longer...

My book Heaven and Earth by Professor Ian Plimer arrived today! Only read about 6 pages. So far it's very readable and some very interesting information. The IPCC have a LOT to answer for! Great front page newspaper report posted above... The consensus among commentators is that AGW is on its way out, I really hope so!

That white motor's a belter man!

Welcome

Yes, but deforestation, overfishing, plastics poisoning the sea and any of the other (real) issues previously mentioned (nice write-up Z), don't get the same air-play because they cannot be used to hammer us and businesses with a Green Tax and the certainly don't attract huge research budgets which keep the white-coated lab rats in a job. As for energy saving light bulbs... where is the ingenuity in those???? They don't give off any freaking light, so no wonder they save energy! But do they tell us of the high mercury-content used in making them, and how hazardous it is to breathe the air in a room where one has been dropped and smashed? No. How do we dispose of these potentially harmful items - landfill! I should say, this is something I heard but as yet haven’t checked out, so feel free to correct me on this while I pursue a reliable source I know the BBC have an agenda (they all do), but I'm really surprised that they are so stubborn. It's beyond belief, despicable actually. Thanks for the links Neil, I will have a squiz at them later

She pointed out that the BBC are not telling anyone about this... which is pretty obvious, but why??? Why would a reputable news service NOT report such a huge issue. I can't fathom that at all. Do they have an agenda? Or should I ask, what is their agenda? Listening and reading about this stuff is making the AGW issue seem more and more ridiculous by the day; how can anyone in their right mind be duped by this? What does this say about our media, our governments our scientists our enviromentalists and others in a postion of authority and power? If this is a huge farce and we really are being "taken in" by all of these poeple... then, why stop at AGW? What else are they not telling us? What else are they lying about? I have always been skeptical of governments and wouldnt trust them as far as I could throw them; but this is in another league. So much for freedom and democracy... what a crock that is.