Climate change could mean the extinction of our species

....... Welcome another patronising supremacist telling people they don't understand because they don't agree with them. You seem to of mistaken which person on here as lost control? I'm really calm & very happy with Br-exit. That's why I'm not wasting my time arguing with idiots on here who can't accept it! The referendum was announced, the people voted, the votes were cast, it's over. Wind in your liberal, do-gooding necks and accept what as happened. There will always be winners and losers after any referendum.
I lost my job because of EU policy so I don't sympathise with any fucker losing their job because of what's happened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chupapau

Oh? Governments should only bail the economy out is it? Countries do not trade? Then why is the UK hurrying to make illegal trade deals quick quick now

---

Illegal? Any proof? Another one losing his marbles on his way to a lunatic asylum maybe? Maybe YOU should be the one calming down?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peejaye

....... Welcome another patronising supremacist telling people they don't understand because they don't agree with them. You seem to of mistaken which person on here as lost control? I'm really calm & very happy with Br-exit. That's why I'm not wasting my time arguing with idiots on here who can't accept it! The referendum was announced, the people voted, the votes were cast, it's over. Wind in your liberal, do-gooding necks and accept what as happened. There will always be winners and losers after any referendum.
I lost my job because of EU policy so I don't sympathise with any fucker losing their job because of what's happened.

---

If you read my posts you will find I am obviously unhappy with the Referendum result, but accept that the UK is leaving. Your problem is that you are unable to defend the decision as something positive when I point out that already, before the UK has formally left the EU, the impact of the decision has been negative on jobs and economic planning. I have even said that the UK in the long term will adjust to the reality of being outside the EU, but that the interim phase between those two events could be longer and more painful than you think, and that it is likely to undermine the domestic policy options Corbyn will have if Labour win the next election for the simple reason that the UK will not have the funds to pay for the party's magnificent policies as they claim they will not raise taxes. Taking responsibility for the decision you made means accepting that income tax will rise, that interest rates will rise, and that your income and standard of living over the next ten years will decline.

You say you don't sympathise with any fucker losing their job because of what's happened, but that is a cynical dismissal of other people's (or, in your words, other fuckers) lives, but entirely part of the cynical jump over the cliff taken by Leave on the basis that they will find out what happens when they hit the ground.

I am surprised given this is a thread on Climate Change you have not joined with the Americans and Telegraph readers who think Climate Change is a hoax.

Not me Mister. I'm laughing my little cock off at you all, I'm sorted come March 2020. I won't go into it but it will be party time if I make it! :party:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peejaye

I lost my job because of EU policy so I don't sympathise with any fucker losing their job because of what's happened.

---

Sure about that? Or were you just told? Due to company relocation? That is not EU, but a worldwide right wing politics achievement, for more money in the Bahama's. Due to a Polish worker taking your job? Then your boss just took someone on who works harder and better then you, without the bitching and whining. And exploiting the Pole at the same time. I've been working with scores of British companies over the last 25 years, I can write you an encyclopedia on British work ethics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peejaye

Illegal? Any proof? Another one losing his marbles on his way to a lunatic asylum maybe? Maybe YOU should be the one calming down?

---

Obviously you don't read or watch news, or limited to what you served in the UK. Proof was all over it some weeks ago. LEGAL binding fact : UK is not allowed to negotiate or sign any trade deal BEFORE the Brexit is final. From a solely UK point of view it is not illegal, it just shows all others what backstabbing cunts are ruling your country. Trust me, the Ozzies and the Kiwis are not that exited the take the Poms back in.

I can also write an encyclopedia about how manipulated the British audience was by both Labour and Tory since Maastricht was signed, a treaty that shifted the focus of "freedom and opportunity for all" towards "no just freedom and opportunity for companies, not people". And it came right out of the Labour masked neo liberal's office of Mr Blair. I can watch and read the news in 5 languages, I get a lot more points of view than you seem to do, before making decisions. As it goes for Brexit, it goes for Global Warming...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peejaye

Not me Mister. I'm laughing my little cock off at you all, I'm sorted come March 2020. I won't go into it but it will be party time if I make it! :party:

---

Which proves Stavros point, your so selfish that you don't even consider your children's and grandchildren's future. And again you write "if I make it". So you are just gambling on in life. You can do that, it is your right to look for the quickest way to disaster. But don't expect putting up a bigmouth means other people have to jump in your grave along with you.

I'm baffled by the patience and energy Stavros displays in answering people like you. Hats off for him. I just don't have the patience anymore, and call out a daft cunt when I see one. If I were to meet you, I'd buy you any drink you wanted for the entire evening. Sort of helping you get done with the world as soon as possible.

Have fun in 2020, if you make it there...

You & Stavros deserve each other, you can spend all day holding hands searching the internet for neo-liberal right of centre websites then posting links on here which bolster your beliefs. You don't know me & I wouldn't want to meet you, clear!

I worked transporting energy by rail, I wasn't replaced by a Pole, my work was safety critical & I was bound by a legal document which was property of the Monarchy. A quarter of the work force were displaced because of green cleaner energy.

Learn not to sterotype people who voted leave, 51.9% of people did & stop behaving like a supremacist fucking arsehole :fu:

PS; & Oh, I gave up on cunts like you a long time ago!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peejaye

You & Stavros deserve each other, you can spend all day holding hands searching the internet for neo-liberal right of centre websites then posting links on here which bolster your beliefs. You don't know me & I wouldn't want to meet you, clear!
Learn not to sterotype people who voted leave, 51.9% of people did & stop behaving like a supremacist fucking arsehole :fu:

---

neo-liberal right of centre websites -tis is not a serious comment Peejaye, and you claimed in an earlier post in the Brexit thread that yu didn't vote to leave the EU as much as vote against the government of David Cameron. This is part of the post-referendum problem because a lot of people who voted as a protest on other issues probably did not expect Leave to win.

We are dealing with a future we cannot know, be it Brexit or Climate Change, but we do have the signs and materials here at hand which act as a warning. The signs on the immediate period when the UK leaves the EU are not good, but you don't seem to care. The warning signs on the climate are substantially more critical because of the length of time it takes for remedial actions to take effect. The UK may survive leaving the EU, albeit not in the same form it is in now; the same cannot be said for coastal communities or cities with meagre water supplies. It is to those ends we should be focused, not on being abusive or dismissive of others. We have only this one world to share and care for as it cares for us

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peejaye

I worked transporting energy by rail, I wasn't replaced by a Pole, my work was safety critical & I was bound by a legal document which was property of the Monarchy. A quarter of the work force were displaced because of green cleaner energy.

---

Nice to point out it was cleaner energy! So what was the problem with you re-schooling? Surely that must have been possible, with the huge reconversion funds offered by the EU?

Or is it, that you want to benefit from a very very early retirement, funded with err young peoples tax money in a social democrat system of pension?

About my asshole, it's a great one, just look to your left.

And here "Global Cooling" ruined a perfectly good forrest in Antarctica....
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/sc...-a8158441.html

Quote:

---

During the Permian Period, Antarctica was much warmer than it is today.

---

From the article you linked,
"During the Permian Period, Antarctica was much warmer than it is today. At the time, Antarctica was then still part of Gondwana, the Southern Hemisphere’s supercontinent that incorporated present-day Africa, South America, Arabia, India and Australia."

Antarctica didn't, at that time, occupy the polar region. To be sure it was still south of the 60S parallel and the forest nevertheless had to be hearty to survive. The warming at that location, at that time was clearly due in part to the (re)location of Antarctica; i.e. to continental drift.

Interesting article. So your point is...not all climate events have been due to the greenhouse effect?...we just need to be hearty?...we should just rearrange the continents?...what?

Addendum: I should have rather said, "...the warmth at that location, at that time..." The later cooling of Antarctica was in part due its movement toward the Southern Polar region.

What "going green" really means......$$$$$$$$$
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2018/...nused-misused/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrFanti

What "going green" really means...

---

So the point is anthropogenic climate change is a hoax perpetrated by the LAPD and BMW? By the State of California so they can torment the LAPD with an unwanted fleet of electric cars? Yeah, that explains everything, except the climate data and why the models based atmospheric and oceanographic physics and chemistry are so good at accounting for those observations.

What the article really demonstrates is that expensive, half-assed measures can create more problems than they solve and that corporations will generally take any opportunity to make a profit. This is the exact opposite of what greening really means.

Your gleeful posting of the article demonstrates that deniers still cannot separate science from politics and political ideology. The fact that a corporation made a profit by selling a fleet of cars to a police force that refused to use them can be used to discredit a any number of institutions and ‘philosophies’, but certainly not the science of climate change.

Look. I don’t pretend to know how to solve all the problems that climate change will bring. My interest in this thread is the science of climate change and it’s possible consequences to the biosphere and the possible consequences to our civilization. I’ll let you figure out whether unregulated market forces alone can circumvent the coming disasters or whether it might necessitate some other form of cooperation. I suppose a truly selfish entrepreneur (in the good sense, à la Ayn Rand) can find a way to profit from any situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrFanti

What "going green" really means......$$$$$$$$$
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2018/...nused-misused/

---

It's good that you've told us you are an independent thinker, otherwise people might get the impression that you are just providing selective pieces of 'evidence' to support a pre-conceived agenda.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trish

What the article really demonstrates is that expensive, half-assed measures can create more problems than they solve and that corporations will generally take any opportunity to make a profit. This is the exact opposite of what greening really means.

---

That's why people who understand economics have always argued for some form of carbon tax or emissions trading scheme, which creates the incentive to reduce emissions but leaves it to the private sector to find the most efficient ways to do so. But people like the Fantisizer won't have a bar of that either, which is why we get a bunch of inefficient bureaucratic measures instead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peejaye

I don't bother wasting my time like you marking thumbs up or thumbs down as it's totally irrelevant!

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peejaye

I'm really calm & very happy with Br-exit. That's why I'm not wasting my time arguing with idiots on here who can't accept it!

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peejaye

You & Stavros deserve each other, you can spend all day holding hands searching the internet for neo-liberal right of centre websites then posting links on here which bolster your beliefs.

Learn not to sterotype people

---

Lmao!

Oh dear, calm down deary :ignore:

The point is not to leave crude measurements out but to accept that you can predict fuck-all with your couple-of-decades worth of temperature measurements, since you do not even consider anything like Solar flux in your shitty report. (That's the answer to Trish's earlier communist post trying to insinuate I am a hypocrite).

Oh, of course state should not interfere in economy. Not bailing out failing enterprises is exactly that. - Not interfering. I am not sure what your point is... Unless that maybe you are trying to say fascism is good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ts RedVeX

The point is not to leave crude measurements out but to accept that you can predict fuck-all with your couple-of-decades worth of temperature measurements, since you do not even consider anything like Solar flux in your shitty report. (That's the answer to Trish's earlier communist post trying to insinuate I am a hypocrite)....

---

(the boldfacing is mine)
What do you think the solar constant measures? What have we been discussing for the last several posts? What do kilowatts per square meter measure if not a flux of energy (in this case from the Sun, you know: Sol)?

[QUOTE=Ts RedVeX;1816577]
The point is not to leave crude measurements out but to accept that you can predict fuck-all with your couple-of-decades worth of temperature measurements, since you do not even consider anything like Solar flux in your shitty report. (That's the answer to Trish's earlier communist post trying to insinuate I am a hypocrite).
--Climate change science is informed by over a century of records, at least get your facts right, if facts are of interest to you.

Oh, of course state should not interfere in economy. Not bailing out failing enterprises is exactly that. -
--The State has paid Carillion millions of pounds to run public services and repair and re-invigorate our public infrastructure. The company has failed -why? According to you markets work, private enterprise works. Perhaps you can explain why this private enterprise has failed in spectacular fashion to meet its contractual obligations to the government as well as its shareholders. And who do you expect to pay the bills, if not the taxpayer? And why should we anyway? There are successful companies in the market, I don't attack the whole of the private sector, but to pretend it is some irreplaceable gift to mankind is to ignore the obvious. It doesn't always work.
So who now is going to complete work on that unfinished hospital, fill in the pot-holes in the road, and so on? Maybe you should start up a company and apply for the contract.

It failed because the majority of idiotic democrats had been voting for socialists who decide to give taxpayer's money (money that was given away by democrats and all other sorts of communists, as well as the money the remaining normal part of the British nation was robbed of). I have said it a few times already and I will say it again: government should not interfere in economy. Bankruptcy is part of the free market's ways and anyone who believes they can bail it out is wrong. - Of course, e.g. in democracy, or republic, where term of office is very short, bailouts are a good way of getting rich quickly by fucking the nation over and fucking off before shit hits the fan... I cannot understand why the majority on here believes in the communist "nanny state" that is supposed to regulate everything. What is truly astonishing and scary, though, is that apart from me, there is absolutely nobody else sane on here, who feels that normality must be brought back or our civilisation will cease to exist within the next 20 or 30 years. Or will you have all died by 2047? And because you all have pensions you do not give a fuck what sort of country your children would have to live in, had you had any? You just push your global warming and other bollocks either because you are to daft to see what is going on or just want your cut of the "fat red cake".

Unless your politicians are going to give more of your money away - taking their shares, of course - or ideally somebody normal decides to liquidate the Ministry of Health, or whatever it is called, nobody will complete your unfinished hospital, because it would not make any sense economically. What is that is so difficult to understand here?

As to filling pot holes, it is a public road so why don't you do it? It is your road as well as it is anyone else's... Can't you see how stupid this way of thinking is? I'll just get an off-road car and I'll be fine.

Show me where that report reads that the research it regards proves that solar flux does not contribute to global warming.

Actually, since we got back to the report, show me where it states that global warming has been proven to be caused by humans. - Cos I have not found such a statement in it.

Quote:

---

...you do not even consider anything like Solar flux...

---

The theory of climate change you oppose is the one that attributes the change to the greenhouse effect, right? That theory maintains that light energy from the Sun (otherwise known as the solar flux) passes through the atmosphere (with some absorption) and warms the Earth’s surface( i.e. surface atoms are excited by their absorption of the solar radiation ). The warmed Earth then radiates that energy (i.e. the excited atoms emit new photons, mostly in the infrared band) outward into the atmosphere, where the greenhouse gasses capture enough of it create a imbalance: i.e. in net, more energy is absorbed from the Sun, than is radiated back out into space.

The whole greenhouse model is based on a detailed analysis of the solar flux at all wavelengths. (I explained this in some detail already back in post #1572.) You’re being more than disingenuous when you claim, “...you do not even consider anything like Solar flux...”

[QUOTE=Ts RedVeX;1816783]

It failed because the majority of idiotic democrats had been voting for socialists who decide to give taxpayer's money (money that was given away by democrats and all other sorts of communists, as well as the money the remaining normal part of the British nation was robbed of).
--This is a complete negation of the facts, which are that it was the government of Margaret Thatcher, basing its policies on free market ideas derived from Adam Smith and Friedrich Hayek, to name but two non-socialists, that believed private enterprise could do a better job than state-owned companies in providing services in key parts of the economy and thus began the trend to out-source major projects to private enterprise. In the US, it was the Reagan Presidency that out-sourced contracts and yet today the largest employer in the US, directly or indirectly is the Federal government of the US and State and local government. I wonder, is your idol in the White House going to dismantle this aspect of the US economy, cancel all those contracts and 'liberate' the markets? And taxation is legal in this country whether or not you regard it as theft.

You imagine into existence a situation in which an entrepreneur creates a company or companies that will meet marked demands for roads, hospitals, libraries, bridges, canals, tunnels, and so forth. But where does capital come from?

In the 19th century the capitalists in the industrial north did indeed build impressive public buildings, canals and railways which still stand in Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield and Birmingham and are threaded through the country. They built schools, libraries, hospitals, and prisons. Where did the money come from? From the profits made from slavery, steel, coal, cotton, machine manufacture, the railways etc -so get this, those buildings were paid for from the profits from (say) textiles they then used to employ other workers to build facilities that were then used to charge the same workers to use them.

Under your system, we consumers could give Carillion £10 million to build a hospital and when it fails, they walk away leaving us without a hospital and nothing for our investment, and your reaction is, so what? Markets fail, deal with it. But why should we then trust another company to take our money if it cannot guarantee success?

I have said it a few times already and I will say it again: government should not interfere in economy. Bankruptcy is part of the free market's ways and anyone who believes they can bail it out is wrong. -
--And how many times do failing businessmen file for bankruptcy to avoid paying workers their wages, and pay back to their investors the money they have lost? In the US it is even possible to file for bankruptcy and get the tax-payer to compensate the Chief Executive who ruined the business. Surely in a free market, if I lend Donald Bandit $10 million as part of an investment in a casino, I expect to get that $10 million back and with interest? In what free market does he screw it up then tell me to get lost? In a rigged market, where capitalists invent tax laws that compensate one man's failure with another man's money.

What is truly astonishing and scary, though, is that apart from me, there is absolutely nobody else sane on here, who feels that normality must be brought back or our civilisation will cease to exist within the next 20 or 30 years.
You are easily scared. Maybe you should be more scared of rising sea levels due to climate change plunging Florida and Manhattan under water; or the threat of nuclear war currently being devised by the Madman-in-Chief in Washington DC.

Or will you have all died by 2047?
-- In my case almost certainly!

As to filling pot holes, it is a public road so why don't you do it? It is your road as well as it is anyone else's... Can't you see how stupid this way of thinking is?
--I could, in theory go to a shop in town, buy a bucket and spade, some cement and fill the hole in the road. In practice, I am not very good with my hands and in fact have no idea how to make cement, never mind fill in a hole. That is why we have trained men and women who know how to do these things. And if I did make an attempt to fill in a hole -in fact I am more concerned with loose paving stones in my town- I would probably be arrested for being a public nuisance and damaging the road.

Actually, since we got back to the report, show me where it states that global warming has been proven to be caused by humans. - Cos I have not found such a statement in it.
-- You can read, and probably know how to use a library or the internet, which is a virtual library. Declaring ignorance on one of the most widely reported issues of our time suggests a lack of interest. Which is your right.

Meanwhile the US Administration has opened its long-awaited trade war with the rest of the world by raising tariffs on the import of solar panels. In practical terms I am not sure what this means as the Guardian assessment is that on the one hand-

Donald Trump’s decision to impose a tariff on imported solar panels will cost the US solar industry about 23,000 jobs this year and risks slowing the growth of clean energy that would help address climate change, renewable energy advocates warned.
While on the other hand

But while the tariffs may provide an unwelcome hurdle for the US solar industry, the cost of the technology and installation has dropped so precipitously in recent years that the industry could emerge relatively unscathed.

The cost of installing solar panels on rooftops has fallen by more than 70% since 2010, according to the Solar Energy Industries Association. Solar now accounts for around 1.4% of US utility-scale electricity generation, up from virtually nothing in 2007.
https://www.theguardian.com/environm...s-solar-panels

I think the key issue here is the commitment to raise tariff barriers on the ideological basis that this will replenish those parts of the US economy that have been lost to offshoring since the 1980s, though the President will not admit it was his idol Ronald Reagan who started it. It also fits into the anti-alternative energy ideology based on the 'hoax' of climate change without regard to the growth of the alternative energy sector in terms of jobs and the provision of cheap energy, and these factors as usual are driven by the 'What did Obama do? Let's undo it' strategy that seems to think that whatever short-term damage is done the US economy will revive. Ironically that might be true, though in the meantime people lose their jobs, and bills rise, but why should the billionaires who run the US care about the little guy?

As for tariff wars and protectionism, again, the 'bring it on' mentality chimes in with the insidious belief that limited nuclear war is realistic, though it remains to be seen if the US military in Syria will assist their Kurdish allies or stand by as Turkey attempts to wipe them out, after all when it comes to protecting the President's business interests in Turkey or protecting the Kurds who played the key role in destroying Daesh in Raqqa, it's the money that matters most. I don't suppose the Landlord is about to divest himself of his Turkish rents -? Who knows?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stavros

Meanwhile the US Administration has opened its long-awaited trade war with the rest of the world by raising tariffs on the import of solar panels. In practical terms I am not sure what this means as the Guardian assessment is that on the one hand-

Donald Trump’s decision to impose a tariff on imported solar panels will cost the US solar industry about 23,000 jobs this year and risks slowing the growth of clean energy that would help address climate change, renewable energy advocates warned.
While on the other hand

But while the tariffs may provide an unwelcome hurdle for the US solar industry, the cost of the technology and installation has dropped so precipitously in recent years that the industry could emerge relatively unscathed.

The cost of installing solar panels on rooftops has fallen by more than 70% since 2010, according to the Solar Energy Industries Association. Solar now accounts for around 1.4% of US utility-scale electricity generation, up from virtually nothing in 2007.
https://www.theguardian.com/environm...s-solar-panels

I think the key issue here is the commitment to raise tariff barriers on the ideological basis that this will replenish those parts of the US economy that have been lost to offshoring since the 1980s, though the President will not admit it was his idol Ronald Reagan who started it. It also fits into the anti-alternative energy ideology based on the 'hoax' of climate change without regard to the growth of the alternative energy sector in terms of jobs and the provision of cheap energy, and these factors as usual are driven by the 'What did Obama do? Let's undo it' strategy that seems to think that whatever short-term damage is done the US economy will revive. Ironically that might be true, though in the meantime people lose their jobs, and bills rise, but why should the billionaires who run the US care about the little guy?

As for tariff wars and protectionism, again, the 'bring it on' mentality chimes in with the insidious belief that limited nuclear war is realistic, though it remains to be seen if the US military in Syria will assist their Kurdish allies or stand by as Turkey attempts to wipe them out, after all when it comes to protecting the President's business interests in Turkey or protecting the Kurds who played the key role in destroying Daesh in Raqqa, it's the money that matters most. I don't suppose the Landlord is about to divest himself of his Turkish rents -? Who knows?

---

solar panel saves money & works for free after installation . it is a good long term investment.

So Trish, have you even not read the report then? Because it clearly says that the scientists involved have not found evidence to prove that global warming is caused by humans. What is your problem with that? Why don't you just present us with some scientific that actually proves your irreverent theory of humans changing Earth's climate? Have you ever looked beyond the greenhouse effect in your global warming proving "analysis"

I would like to make it clear that I am not and I never have written that Earth's climate is not changing. I am only stating that we - humanity - have as much as nothing to negligibly little to do with the change. Unless we develop new technologies, we indeed might become extinct. Only it will be due to ass-holes like you and Stavros, and any other pseudo scientist who does science for money rather than because they like it.

Stavros, I am sorry but i am an ignorant cunt an I am not even going to read your shit. We have already established that you simply believe in the communist (a.k.a.) nanny state that I totally oppose to (due to the values believe in, with which I have been brought up with) There is no way you can logically convince me to assume that your point of view is the "good one". I can only say that this time it wont be me who is going to refuse to fight the "bad guys" when shit hits the fan... So far, I have been very disappointed in the UK. It is definitely not what I had expected https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvz8tg4MVpA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ts RedVeX

Stavros, I am sorry but i am an ignorant cunt an I am not even going to read your shit. We have already established that you simply believe in the communist (a.k.a.) nanny state that I totally oppose to (due to the values believe in, with which I have been brought up with) There is no way you can logically convince me to assume that your point of view is the "good one". I can only say that this time it wont be me who is going to refuse to fight the "bad guys" when shit hits the fan... So far, I have been very disappointed in the UK. It is definitely not what I had expected

---

The only thing that has been established, other than your dependence on abusive words (that diminish the quality of your argument), is that you yearn to live in a country that has neither government nor taxes, but cannot go beyond that to tell is if or when or where this Utopia is going to exist, but at least it gives you something to complain about, other than the treatment you get on the NHS, which for some reason you seem to prefer rather than using your hard-earned cash to take advantage of the private health care that is also available in the UK. There may be better countries to live in than the UK, there are certainly many more that are much worse at every level. You are always welcome to join in the debates that we have, it is up to you to choose the degree of intelligence, wit and empathy you bring to this forum.

Well, If someone keeps bullshitting about me wanting to live in a country with neither government nor taxes, while I clearly stated several times now that I would advocate inherited monarchy with taxes for police and military, all the "abusive words" just come naturally. Have I mentioned that I am not in favour of censorship already or is that another thing that you just cannot acknowledge?

Treatment I get on the NHS... Firstly, anyone who lives in the UK and wants to work legally is being threatened with penalties for tax evasion. Taxes include the obligatory National Insurance contributions. Since I am still a guest here, and I respect my host's law I do actually pay those with my hard-earned cash so you can fuck off!

The reason why I rant about it is because obligatory insurance is a communist trait and it works against development of private clinics that either cannot or find it very hard to compete with your socialist NHS that gets free support from your government. And still, if you try to get certain things done "on the NHS" it turns out that you have to pay extra for it anyway, you moron. E.g. If I need a certificate before a porn shoot I have to pay 30quid for it. That is 30 quid for a piece of paper, plus half a day off because of some stupid law that apparently does not allow them to send it by email or post; parking fee; and fuel or fare for a few busses. What a lying communist arse-hole or how deluded must one be to call that "free"? Have you had your brains removed on the NHS recently, or something? That means it may cost me anything from 35 quid to around 400 quid (unlikely but possible) if the day turns out to one that would have been a good one hadn't your socialist NHS and related legislation fucked it up.

As to hormones, I still pay for "prescriptions" so meds are not quite free now, are they?

With some exceptions such as children and senior citizens the NHS is not free. Citizens pay a monthly National Insurance contribution and in return they are entitled to a full range of services 'from the cradle to the grave'. As I pointed out to you before, prescriptions for medicine were free until the outbreak of war in Korea. In order to meet some of the cost of the UK's military contribution, the Labour government introduced prescription charges, leading Aneurin Bevan, the Minister responsible for introducing the NHS in 1948 to resign from the government in protest. Nevertheless, the basic principle is that health care is 'free at the time of use' so that, for example, we don't pay a fee to see a doctor, or to a hospital if we receive treatment in A&E or for an operation. Most charges in the NHS have been introduced since Margaret Thatcher became Prime Minister, but something tells me you are reluctant to blame her for anything that has gone wrong with the NHS even though it was her government that introduced the 'internal market reforms' in the mid-1980s that have cause so much damage to our service while enriching a few corporations.

You complain that obligatory insurance is a communist trait yet is there another means of creating health services that is not some form of insurance scheme, private or public? And why would anyone not want health insurance, and what would happen if they did not and fell ill? Presumably live with rotten teeth and that misery for years, or just die of some other illness. As for fees for certificates, these latter are recent introductions designed to raise money and originated with the Blair government I believe, they may not fit with the principle of free treatment, but are not issued for treatment as such.

All of this treatment is available to you in the private sector if you are prepared to take out a private health insurance policy or pay for treatment on a pay-as-you-go basis, and as far as I am aware, most of the private health staff work in the NHS, so it is odd that you should see the two as competing, though this may not be the case with cosmetic surgery and some private clinics offering alternative services.

I could use some abusive language to describe someone who comes to live in the UK and 'takes advantage' of our NHS which provides a whole range of courses for transgendered individuals ranging from counselling to sex reassignment surgery and appears to do nothing less than criticise and moan about the treatment. One wonders why you do not seek the range of treatment and surgery in Poland, or Thailand, or maybe Sweden if you want to stay in the EU. But my guess is that your reply will just be another parade of vituperative anti-communist invective serving no purpose.

If I am supposed to fund your Korean wars then I would like to do that by paying the Korean war tax and not my personal health insurance. Let's call things by their due names, shall we - just like I call people whose IQ I consider to be in between 50 and 69 morons. From my point of view prescriptions are unnecessary. I just need the medicine. I did say that M. Thatcher was not perfect. Especialy that she had found herself living in a country overrun by communists, or democrats, who thought that they were supposed to lead the country. She had to bribe the nation with something and bribe the men in power with something to even become important. That is yet another flaw of democracy. One cannot propose any reasonable project for under threat of losing electorate: The dim mob constituting of you alike needs a slogan like "more money for the public health care" and they readily vote for Communists like Jeremy Corbyn. As soon as her excellency Theresa May says - reasonably - "no more 'free' food for pupils" the dim mob think they loose... While it actually means their children's food would have been 40% cheaper had it been prepared by parents rather than a state-appointed officer, in accordance with E Savas's law.

Going back to the STI tests anyone in the UK can have "freely" done, they do not include tests against type C hepatitis. This basically means that a rotten capitalist like myself, who had planned their international photo-shoot more than 2 weeks in advance (which is the time needed by the glorious NHS funded from people-who-do-not-really-use-it's money), has to waste half of their day to have the tests done, pay 4 quid parking and whatever the fuel cost is, or bus fare plus a few extra work-hours to the half-day, or cycle there and back and add yet another 2 work-hours (I do not even expect you to know what that means, comrade Stavros and yeah in communism as long as one punches the card it doesn't really matter whether they do something or not)... Then has to do waste yet another half-a-day to do that yet another time and collect the results and request a print out (the earlier mentioned 30quid in cash) - no you cannot use bank cards unless maybe it was just the alien tranny from the Continent who you proles want to fuck in the ass so much... And then it turns out that your tests did not include the hep C test. That means you cannot just go back to the NHS and say you are a heroin junkie just to get a routine hep C test because you no longer have the 2 weeks before your shoot. You do have to pay the 150quid for a test by a private clinic, that will show all you need and give you results by email within 2 working days.

Now. before you say that if i really need them so fast then i should pay the 150 and shut the fuck up I ask you. Of what quality is the sort of service, that we all pay for monthly, (no not you dole scroungers and wino democrats) that makes us, have to go through the ordeal to get you the the porn you want. Why cannot it be simplier? I could have printed that fucking results myself. I could have done it pirvately, having said "to hell with my NI"... Well FUCK YOU. I am at least gonna rant about it on this board. That is the best I can do. They do not sell helicopters at Maplin's yet and I am not a freaking general of the RAF.

And no, I do not take advantage of the NHS. I pay for it and I take from it what I am entitled to. I also do not take any of your communist counselling, which is, by the way, total bullshit. I would be more than happy to pay the 40% less price for all I the meds I need in a country with no public NHS.

Abusive language is the most pleasant form of disapproval, hopefully, if the English miraculously regain their identity, scum like you are going to see in the next decade or two.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ts RedVeX

Abusive language is the most pleasant form of disapproval, hopefully, if the English miraculously regain their identity, scum like you are going to see in the next decade or two.

---

Thank you for choosing the United Kingdom as your home, enjoy your time with us. If it is your most intense desire to transition from a male to a female identity, and if you are the citizen of a member state of the EU, may I recommend that you leave the UK and travel east to Poland, and register with the Klinika Chirurgii Plastycznej, Medycyny Estetycznej i Flebologii Solumed in Poznań.

In Poland SRS operations are much cheaper than abroad. For instance, on the British Isles, the treatment co-funded by the NHS costs approximately £10000 (55 thousand zlotys). Dr. A. Sankowski's Plastic Surgery Clinic in Warsaw offers an operation involving the recontstruction of scrotum from the labia minora and majora. The cost of the procedure starts at 7 thousand zlotys. The patients of this centre can also undergo the female-to-male sex reassignment surgery - the cost of the operation starts with 20 thousand zlotys. The Klinika Chirurgii Plastycznej, Medycyny Estetycznej i Flebologii Solumed in Poznań offers the female-to-male gender correction procedure for the cost of 32.5 thousand zlotys. The male-to-female operation costs 27 thousand zlotys.

The medical team of the Medical University in Gdańsk can boast the most extensive professional experience in performing male-to-female procedures. The SRS operations are performed by Prof. Kazimierz Krajka, M. D., PhD, highly recommended on the transseksualizm.pl forum. Patients determined to have the procedure performed by Prof. Krajka must be aware that he only accepts cases with referrals from Dr Stanisław Dulka, a sexologist from Warsaw. Male-to-female SRS treatment costs approximately 14 thousand zlotys at the clinic. The Barlicki hospital in ‎Łódź can present some impressive achievements in reference to genital reassignment surgeries. The operations are performed by Dr Bogusław Antoszewski, M. D., PhD, the head of the Plastic Surgery Clinic at the Hospital. The medical team of the clinic performs a complete sex change of a transgendered person, starting with the removal of Adam's apple and finishing on the phallic reconstruction. The cost of the sex change operation is 50 thousand zlotys.
http://www.tourmedica.co.uk/treatmen...ies-in-poland/

Why thank you but I could have gotten the SRS for "free" in communist Holland, while I lived there. I even have the referrals from the gender team of VUmc in Amsterdam... So I could go there now, and get some local insurance, and get the whole SRS refunded.. The problem is: I do not trust those communist fucks, after they said I had to go through all the same shit in the Netherladns I had to have gone throug in Poland to get government's permission to get my own body altered by a reputable doctor without him risking being put to jail for doing his job...

So please.. You stop shitposting and I will stop my abusive language. - Cos that is how it works, you know. People aren't really bothered until you agitate them. Which is what the mainstream media's main task is these days. - To piss people off and direct their anger at a certain collective of other people. In other words, we are supposed to have a civil war. Now that does not sound promising, does it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ts RedVeX

Why thank you but I could have gotten the SRS for "free" in communist Holland, while I lived there. I even have the referrals from the gender team of VUmc in Amsterdam... So I could go there now, and get some local insurance, and get the whole SRS refunded.. The problem is: I do not trust those communist fucks, after they said I had to go through all the same shit in the Netherladns I had to have gone throug in Poland to get government's permission to get my own body altered by a reputable doctor without him risking being put to jail for doing his job...

---

Human societies have developed, and have been sustained by rules, they are a fact of life. As a citizen of the EU you have the right to live and work in 28 countries, which I guess means 28 health services, all of which have rules. I cannot help you as I don't know enough about the provision of health services for transgendered people across Europe, whereas I suspect that you do. You have on more than one occasion dismissed me and a substantial number of people in the UK as 'Communists' and 'Idiots' -sometimes both at the same time- because we choose to pay taxes in return for services such as health and education. On that basis you demoralize the validity of you arguments about politics which most of the time are of marginal interest or simply irrelevant.

Why don't you go & try living in one of these wonderful EU countries?
I can assure you Mister; you would be in for a big shock!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peejaye

Why don't you go & try living in one of these wonderful EU countries?
I can assure you Mister; you would be in for a big shock!

---

I have, and have often regretted returning to the UK, but neither of us have the ability to go back in time and change the things we got wrong. There are enough shocks in the UK to deal with, on that we can I hope agree, even if I appear to be the only person defending the NHS from its critics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ts RedVeX

Have you ever looked beyond the greenhouse effect in your global warming proving "analysis"

---

Covered that ground -at your request- already back in posts #1585 and #1590:

"The Earth’s precession (the gyroscopic wobble of its spin axis), it’s orbital eccentricity and other orbital parameters vary through a complex set of not yet thoroughly understood cycles called the Milankovitch cycles. As you say, variations in these parameters will induce variations in the flux of solar energy reaching the Earth’s surface and do (when acting in synchrony) force changes in the Earth’s climate. The cyclic occurrences of Earth’s ice-ages are linked to the Milankovitch cycles. These cycles have (on a human scale) very large periods: on the order of tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of years (the period of Earth’s precession is somewhere around 25000 years and the period in the variations of Earth’s eccentricity is on the order of 112000 years). That’s why over the period of a mere 200 years these variations are largely negligible. However, if you want to include them in the current climate model, know that the Milankovich cycles are now slowing (by a very very small amount) the warming of the Earth. But they are no match against the greenhouse gases that billions of people have been dumping into the atmosphere over the past 1.5 centuries." - from post#1585

" You can do the calculation either way. Leave out the 19th century measurements of the solar constant altogether, or put them in. You can leave out the effect of Sunspot activity or include it. Leave out the effect of the Milankovitch cycles or put them in. Either way you’ll find that at this moment in time the greenhouse-effect utterly swamps all other factors that might modify the temperature of the our planet. The current warming trend is indisputably due, primarily, to the precipitous rise of greenhouse gases that humans have been dumping into the atmosphere for over a century." - from post #1590

Oh yeah, the Solar Flux is already a key part of the currently accepted model of the current climate shift.

"The theory of climate change you oppose is the one that attributes the change to the greenhouse effect, right? That theory maintains that light energy from the Sun (otherwise known as the solar flux) passes through the atmosphere (with some absorption) and warms the Earth’s surface( i.e. surface atoms are excited by their absorption of the solar radiation ). The warmed Earth then radiates that energy (i.e. the excited atoms emit new photons, mostly in the infrared band) outward into the atmosphere, where the greenhouse gasses capture enough of it create a imbalance: i.e. in net, more energy is absorbed from the Sun, than is radiated back out into space.

The whole greenhouse model is based on a detailed analysis of the solar flux at all wavelengths. (I explained this in some detail already back in post #1572.) You’re being more than disingenuous when you claim, “...you do not even consider anything like Solar flux...” " -from #1623

Here we go again-

Donald Trump has expressed doubts over the existence of climate change, as it is understood by the vast majority of scientists.

After proclaiming his belief in “clean air and clean water”, the US President questioned some of the central tenets of climate science in an interview with Piers Morgan.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a8181381.html

Presidents get an easy ride. They go to Congress to deliver a 'State of the Union' message that is not challenged on the floor; they are interviewed by their friends so they look good, whereas in the UK the Prime Minister must answer questions in the House of Commons, and be grilled by hostile interviewers -and why not? Why not present the President with the hard core evidence that he is a racist? Is it not part of the job description to be subject to robust interrogation? I mean, Piers Morgan! Which one of the two is more self-obsessed?

As for climate change...hot, cold, wet, dry...I mean it's all so complicated!

No, I cannot see where you presented any extracts or link to bits of the report that consider anything other than CO2 and temperatures... I can also not see any links to where it actually says that global warming is caused by humans and that humans can do any about it. As to you looking into solar flux, I seriously doubt that even capable of understanding what it is, never mind proving that it is negligible in Earth climate changes' examination. Especially that you keep saying I do not believe in climate change, which is not true. I believe in climate change. What I do not believe in is that humans can influence it in any meaningful way.

As to rules in societies.. Yes we need rules. Simple, clear rules that can be understood easily and followed. Not excess rules that 90% of the nation wouldn't even be able to figure out the meaning of.

Oh, if you regret coming back to the UK then why won't you go live somewhere else? lol

Here we go again... more of Stavros Trish & co. eristics