This is a friendly, interactive exchange of information on all Real Estate related subjects. Follow on Twitter: @RETALKS


Moderator: admin

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 99
 
jimtan
Real Estate Talker
Topic Author
Posts: 5514
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 10:59 pm
Contact:

Re: Climate Warming is coming to BC

Wed Dec 19, 2012 11:58 pm

Let's review the science involved. There are two kinds of analysis; historical statistical analysis versus model building and projection.

The clever scientists have now build a vast historical database. Based on the data, the IPCC has concluded with scientific certainty that global warming is occurring and that human agency is responsible for most of it. See the charts from the Pew Center.

That debate is over. The scientific organizations all back IPCC's work.

The hard part is model building and projecting forward. The global warming mechanism is imperfectly understood. We will learn as it progresses before our very eyes.

In fact, the biggest variable is how much CO2 we will continue to release in the 21st Century. Do we begin to address global warming today, or pass the buck? Is it our grandchilden's problem or our problem?

Are you listening bcj?

Confidence in the models are increasing, but no prediction is possible at this time. We can only model scenarios and update the probability over time.

It is possible that global warming will proceed at a slower rate than anticipated. But, sea level will rise faster than expected because continental ice sheets disintegrate at an accelerated pace. The worst outcome is if global warming and glacier melting both exceed anticipation.

That is, the much talked about feedback effect and tipping points. What would happen if global warming and sea rise accelerate AT AN EXPONENTIAL RATE?

Look at the wiki chart. There was massive sea level fall 8,000 years ago. By 4,000 years ago, the rate of fall had levelled off. From 3,000 years ago, sea level was RISING minutely 0.1mm/yr on average.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Holoc ... _Level.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rising_sea ... d_ice_caps


But, in the last century sea level has risen at a rate of 1.7mm/yr. That's 17x factor. The interesting and scary bit is that sea level has risen at in the last 15 years by 3mm/yr. That's a 2x increase!

Careful scientists will warn that the data series is too short to be conclusive.

Let's assume that the IPCC scientists have been too conservative. In 2001, the IPCC suggested that sea level might rise 0.1-0.9m by 2100. In 2007, they suggested 18-59cm after excluding the effect of melting ice sheets.

Since 2007, additional work on ice sheet melting suggests a range of 55-200cm by 2100. That's 5x increase in the lower limit of the range. 2x increase in the upper limit. from The Rignot study suggests 0.3m rise by 2050; or 7mm/yr. Or, 1.5x the sea level rise for the entire 20th Century.

Now, that doesn't sound very dangerous. We will need to cut our CO2 emissions by a lot. But, do we need to actively build our flood protection right now?

The beauty of a climate engine is that it works through several mechanisms. We will see sea level rise as well as stronger storms; a.k.a Hurricane Sandy.

So, the danger is here and now. After just an 8” rise in sea level in the 20th Century, coastal Delta and Ladner are in danger. Plus parts of Stanley Park and Richmond. Welcome to the brave new world!

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/metro/ ... story.html


Let's play with the numbers. From a risk management POV, any negative trend that is accelerating heavily is something to be concerned about. Last assume that sea level rise accelerates at 5x per decade. That is, 15mm/yr in the next decade and 75mm/yr in the next decade.

That works out to 0.9m by 2032. Scary?

At the moment this is a very low probability. But, accelerating climate engines cannot be underestimated. Stay tuned for he next IPCC report in 2014.

May the force be with you! May the climate change deniers choke on their dessert.
 
User avatar
vancouverowner
Real Estate Talker
Posts: 266
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 1:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Climate Warming is coming to BC

Thu Dec 20, 2012 9:30 am

 
timber2012
Real Estate Talker
Posts: 1730
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2011 10:50 am
Contact:

Re: Climate Warming is coming to BC

Thu Dec 20, 2012 10:26 am

that's indisputable proof that jimtan is right about global warming.
George Carlin once said "Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.”
 
jimtan
Real Estate Talker
Topic Author
Posts: 5514
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 10:59 pm
Contact:

Re: Climate Warming is coming to BC

Thu Dec 20, 2012 1:37 pm

Thanks. Now, that is amazing!!!!!!

Never thought that I would see it in my lifetime. Anyone know whether this has happened before? Kits Pool was built 1960s (?).
 
thomasbeyer2000
Real Estate Talker
Posts: 82
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 7:39 pm
Contact:

Re: Climate Warming is coming to BC

Thu Dec 20, 2012 2:58 pm

The scientific debate about global warming is over. ...
One of the key assumptions is the overall growth of CO2 emmissions due to economic growth. That world wide economic growth may be lower than assumed, and the CO2 emitting energy used to drive it will be far far more expensive, namely oil and coal. This reason alone makes the hockey stick assumptions about temperature increase, sea level rise and extreme weather predictions unrealistic.

See this interesting Letter by 125 renowned scientists to UN Secretary General re climate change that essentially states that current scientific knowledge does not substantiate his assertions on global "warming": http://opinion.financialpost.com/2012/1 ... cientists/

Excerpts: The “even larger climate shocks” you have mentioned would be worse if the world cooled than if it warmed. Climate changes naturally all the time, sometimes dramatically. The hypothesis that our emissions of CO2 have caused, or will cause, dangerous warming is not supported by the evidence.

The incidence and severity of extreme weather has not increased. There is little evidence that dangerous weather-related events will occur more often in the future. The U.N.’s own Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says in its Special Report on Extreme Weather (2012) that there is “an absence of an attributable climate change signal” in trends in extreme weather losses to date. The funds currently dedicated to trying to stop extreme weather should therefore be diverted to strengthening our infrastructure so as to be able to withstand these inevitable, natural events, and to helping communities rebuild after natural catastrophes such as tropical storm Sandy.

There is no sound reason for the costly, restrictive public policy decisions proposed at the U.N. climate conference in Qatar. Rigorous analysis of unbiased observational data does not support the projections of future global warming predicted by computer models now proven to exaggerate warming and its effects.
 
jimtan
Real Estate Talker
Topic Author
Posts: 5514
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 10:59 pm
Contact:

Re: Climate Warming is coming to BC

Thu Dec 20, 2012 4:40 pm


See this interesting Letter by 125 renowned scientists to UN Secretary General re climate change that essentially states that current scientific knowledge does not substantiate his assertions on global "warming": http://opinion.financialpost.com/2012/1 ... cientists/

Thomas,

Not sure why you brought this letter to our attention. It's pretty much useless. Just a petition by a group of concerned citizens offering an opinion, without any specifics or evidence.

The environmental movement generates tonnes of this kinda stuff annually. Some of which are backed by decent science.

BTW, is David Suzuki one of the signatories?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Suzuki


"Suzuki is unequivocal that climate change is a very real and pressing problem and that an "overwhelming majority of scientists" now agree that human activity is responsible. The David Suzuki Foundation website has a clear statement of this:


The debate is over about whether or not climate change is real. Irrefutable evidence from around the world - including extreme weather events, record temperatures, retreating glaciers, and rising sea levels - all point to the fact climate change is happening now and at rates much faster than previously thought.


The overwhelming majority of scientists who study climate change agree that human activity is responsible for changing the climate. The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is one of the largest bodies of international scientists ever assembled to study a scientific issue, involving more than 2,500 scientists from more than 130 countries. The IPCC has concluded that most of the warming observed during the past 50 years is attributable to human activities. Its findings have been publicly endorsed by the National Academies of Science of all G8 nations, as well as those of China, India and Brazil.[10]

Suzuki says that despite this growing consensus, many in the public and the media seemed doubtful about the science for many years. The reason for the confusion about climate change, in Suzuki's view, was due to a well-organized campaign of disinformation about the science involved. "A very small number of critics" denies that climate change exists and that humans are the cause. These climate change “skeptics” or "deniers", Suzuki claims, tend not to be climate scientists and do not publish in peer-reviewed scientific journals but rather target the media, the general public, and policy makers. Their goal: "delaying action on climate change." According to Suzuki, the skeptics have received significant funding from coal and oil companies, including ExxonMobil. They are linked to "industry-funded lobby groups", such as the Information Council on the Environment (ICE),[11] whose aim is to "reposition global warming as theory (not fact)."


BTW, what makes you think that these are 125 'renowned scientists'? Obviously, you haven't check the list of signatories.


Here's a chart from the Pew Center for westcoast.
Attachments
temptrend-ocean-land.jpg
temptrend-ocean-land.jpg (220.31 KiB) Viewed 6626 times
 
Geyser
Real Estate Talker
Posts: 3569
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2012 5:26 pm
Location: In a van down by the river
Contact:

Re: Climate Warming is coming to BC

Thu Dec 20, 2012 5:45 pm

All very interesting but, if I follow your highly questionable logic on real estate prices, yesterday's snow storm conclusively disproved the global warming theory. Your massive confirmation bias isn't causing you to apply double standards is it?
In fond memory of Taipan, a model of modesty, decency, dignity and tolerance. Long may we all prosper from the tremendous legacy of worldly wisdom and specialized real estate knowledge which he left in the "Arguments" thread.
 
jimtan
Real Estate Talker
Topic Author
Posts: 5514
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 10:59 pm
Contact:

Re: Climate Warming is coming to BC

Thu Dec 20, 2012 11:31 pm

All very interesting but, if I follow your highly questionable logic on real estate prices, yesterday's snow storm conclusively disproved the global warming theory. Your massive confirmation bias isn't causing you to apply double standards is it?
HahaHaHa! How's that for the ultimate cherry picking? One snowstorm and GLOBAL warming goes out the window?

Hah! If only life was that easy! :D

Sorry, Geezer. I can see that senility has affected your ability to read and retain. I'll go easy on you.

The evidence is clear that GLOBAL warming is occurring. A lot of effort is now underway to assess the regional micro-climate. One prediction from the climate models is that global warming results in changes in the atmospheric and oceanic currents. The unfortunate consequence is that instability will increase.

We have seen a storm hit us from the west. Then, a cold front hit us from the Arctic. Get it?

Here's a timely article from a AP science reporter.

http://seattletimes.com/html/businesste ... sters.html


“As 2012 began, winter in the U.S. went AWOL. Spring and summer arrived early with wildfires, blistering heat and drought. And fall hit the eastern third of the country with the ferocity of Superstorm Sandy.

This past year's weather was deadly, costly and record-breaking everywhere - but especially in the United States...

In 2012 many of the warnings scientists have made about global warming went from dry studies in scientific journals to real-life video played before our eyes: Record melting of the ice in the Arctic Ocean. U.S. cities baking at 95 degrees or hotter. Widespread drought. Flooding. Storm surge inundating swaths of New York City.

All of that was predicted years ago by climate scientists and all of that happened in 2012...

Globally, five countries this year set heat records, but none set cold records. 2012 is on track to be the warmest year on record in the United States. Worldwide, the average through November suggests it will be the eighth warmest since global record-keeping began in 1880.

July was the hottest month in record-keeping U.S. history, averaging 77.6 degrees. Over the year, more than 69,000 local heat records were set - including 356 locations in 34 states that hit their highest-ever temperature mark.

America's heartland lurched from one extreme to the other without stopping at "normal." Historic flooding in 2011 gave way to devastating drought in 2012.

"The normal has changed, I guess," said U.S. National Weather Service acting director Laura Furgione. "The normal is extreme..."

But the most troubling climate development this year was the melting at the top of the world, Jarraud said. Summer sea ice in the Arctic shrank to 18 percent below the previous record low. The normally ice-packed Arctic passages were open to shipping much of the summer, more than ever before, and a giant Russian tanker carrying liquefied natural gas made a delivery that way to prove how valuable this route has become, said Mark Serreze, director of the National Snow and Ice Data Center.

Also in Greenland, 97 percent of the surface ice sheet had some melting. Changes in the Arctic alter the rest of the world's weather and "melting of the ice means an amplifying of the warming," Jarraud said...

In 2011, the United States set a record with 14 billion-dollar weather disasters. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has a preliminary count of 11 such disasters this year. And NOAA's official climate extreme index, which tallies disasters and rare events like super-hot days, is on pace to set its own record.

Arndt points to the geographic heart of America, the Mississippi River, as emblematic.

On May 6, 2011, the Mississippi River at New Madrid, Mo., crested at its highest point on record. Less than 16 months later on Aug. 30, 2012, the same spot on the river was more than 53 feet lower, hitting an all-time low water mark...

These are "clearly not freak events," but "systemic changes," said climate scientist Stefan Rahmstorf of the Potsdam Institute in Germany. "With all the extremes that, really, every year in the last 10 years have struck different parts of the globe, more and more people absolutely realize that climate change is here and already hitting us."

In 1988, NASA scientist James Hansen, sometimes called the godfather of global warming science, ran computer models that predicted the decade of the 2010s would see many more 95-degree or hotter days and much fewer subfreezing days. This year made Hansen's predictions seemed like underestimates. For example, he predicted that in the 2010s Memphis would have on average 26 days of more than 95 degrees. This year there were 47...

For decades, scientists have predicted extensive droughts from global warming. This year, the drought of 2012 was so extensive that nearly 2,300 counties - in almost every state - were declared agriculture disasters. At one point this summer more than 65 percent of the Lower 48 was suffering from drought...

"Take any one of these events in isolation, it might be possible to yell `fluke!' Take them collectively, it provides confirmation of precisely what climate scientists predicted would happen decades ago if we proceeded with business-as-usual fossil fuel burning, as we have," Pennsylvania State University climate scientist Michael Mann said in an email. "And this year especially is a cautionary tale. What we view today as unprecedented extreme weather will become the new normal in a matter of decades if we proceed with business-as-usual."

I rest my case.
 
Geyser
Real Estate Talker
Posts: 3569
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2012 5:26 pm
Location: In a van down by the river
Contact:

Re: Climate Warming is coming to BC

Fri Dec 21, 2012 12:21 am

Sorry JT I forgot about your impediment, I should have added "(sarc.)" as I promised.

Glad to see your double standard of logic is alive and well. Global RE markets may be crashing and hundreds of years of data show that longbterm RE prices closely track inflation but Oslo has done okay recently thus proving that Vancouver prices are permanently headed up, up, up! :lol: (more sarc.) :lol:

Seriously, I know you're not the sharpest knife in the drawer but did you really misread my post that badly? Really? :roll:
In fond memory of Taipan, a model of modesty, decency, dignity and tolerance. Long may we all prosper from the tremendous legacy of worldly wisdom and specialized real estate knowledge which he left in the "Arguments" thread.
 
jimtan
Real Estate Talker
Topic Author
Posts: 5514
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 10:59 pm
Contact:

Re: Climate Warming is coming to BC

Fri Dec 21, 2012 10:11 am

So, on the subject of climate change deniers. One of the most infamous is Fred Singer.

He was actually a environmental scientist knwon for his work with weather satellites and the EPA. Got his PHD in 1948 (at age 24) and retired from his faculty in 1994.

Since then, he's been a vocal opponent of IPCC and climate change. Unfortunately, he's also known for some dubious stunts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Singer


“Singer wrote the "Leipzig Declaration on Global Climate Change in the U.S." in 1995, updating it in 1997 to rebut the Kyoto Protocol... Scheuering writes that Singer circulated this in the United States and Europe and gathered 100 signatories, though she says some of the signatories' credentials were questioned. At least 20 were television weather reporters, some did not have science degrees, and 14 were listed as professors without specifying a field. According to Scheuering, some of them later said they believed they were signing a document in favour of action against climate change.[63]

Singer set up the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) after a 2004 United Nations climate conference in Milan. NIPCC organized an international climate workshop in Vienna in April 2007,[64] to provide what they called an independent examination of the evidence for climate change.[65] Singer prepared an NIPCC report called "Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate," published in March 2008 by the Heartland Institute, a conservative think tank.[64] ABC News said the same month that unnamed climate scientists from NASA, Stanford, and Princeton who spoke to ABC about the report dismissed it as "fabricated nonsense." In a letter of complaint to ABC News, Singer said their piece used "prejudicial language, distorted facts, libelous insinuations, and anonymous smears."[60]

In December 2009, after the release of thousands of e-mails from the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit—a controversy that came to be known as "Climategate"—Singer wrote an opinion piece for Reuters in which he said the scientists had misused peer review, pressured editors to prevent publication of alternative views, and smeared opponents. He said the leaked e-mails showed that the "surface temperature data that IPCC relies on is based on distorted raw data and algorithms that they will not share with the science community." He argued that the incident exposed a flawed process, and that the temperature trends were heading downwards even as greenhouse gases like CO2 were increasing in the atmosphere... A British House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee later issued a report that largely exonerated the scientists.[67]”

Second chart from Pew Center
Attachments
co2-temp.jpg
co2-temp.jpg (244.8 KiB) Viewed 6495 times
 
Geyser
Real Estate Talker
Posts: 3569
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2012 5:26 pm
Location: In a van down by the river
Contact:

Re: Climate Warming is coming to BC

Fri Dec 21, 2012 1:02 pm

No comment on your double standard eh?

Long term analysis of RE data = meaningless. Long term analysis of weather data = priceless.
In fond memory of Taipan, a model of modesty, decency, dignity and tolerance. Long may we all prosper from the tremendous legacy of worldly wisdom and specialized real estate knowledge which he left in the "Arguments" thread.
 
jimtan
Real Estate Talker
Topic Author
Posts: 5514
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 10:59 pm
Contact:

Re: Climate Warming is coming to BC

Fri Dec 21, 2012 2:10 pm

:roll:
No comment on your double standard eh?

Long term analysis of RE data = meaningless. Long term analysis of weather data = priceless.
Sorry Geezer. It's times like this when I doubt your mental capacity. Unfortunately, these moments occur too often.

The 300-year Amsterdam study is fine as a historical study. I object when you apply it to Vancouver on the Pacific Rim. What's the time horizon we are looking at? I'm looking 5-10 years; not 300 years.

What kinda analysis would be useful for Vancouver. Surely, a classical review of supply and demand offers the best forecast. After all, many factors impact demand; not just income. Acceleration upwards will continue as long as the fundamental factors remain unchanged. You can quote me on this.

We don't need dumb number crunching which is what the Amsterdam study is about.


:roll:


What about the scientific basis for climate change? Obviously you failed to read what I said on December 20th. The scientific consensus has moved beyond mere historical statistical analysis. The scientists are building models and testing them. And, integrating inter-disciplinary models. This is big.

So, a Nobel Peace Prize for the IPCC and researchers. But, no Nobel Economics Prize for Shiller.

Eugene Fama (also never won the Nobel Economics Prize) is a far more famous economist than Shiller. Fama offers this critique of Shiller.

"There are some economists who challenge the predictive power of Shiller's publication. Eugene Fama, the Robert R. McCormick Distinguished Service Professor of Finance at The University of Chicago has written that Shiller "has been consistently pessimistic about prices,"[1] so given a long enough horizon, Shiller is bound to be able to claim that he has foreseen any given crisis."


Hope this helps. But, I doubt it.


:roll:
Attachments
vostok-ice-core_013107_062554.jpg
vostok-ice-core_013107_062554.jpg (62.76 KiB) Viewed 6466 times
 
rofina
Real Estate Talker
Posts: 1552
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 6:39 pm
Contact:

Re: Climate Warming is coming to BC

Fri Dec 21, 2012 4:59 pm

:roll:
No comment on your double standard eh?

Long term analysis of RE data = meaningless. Long term analysis of weather data = priceless.
Sorry Geezer. It's times like this when I doubt your mental capacity. Unfortunately, these moments occur too often.

The 300-year Amsterdam study is fine as a historical study. I object when you apply it to Vancouver on the Pacific Rim. What's the time horizon we are looking at? I'm looking 5-10 years; not 300 years.

What kinda analysis would be useful for Vancouver. Surely, a classical review of supply and demand offers the best forecast. After all, many factors impact demand; not just income. Acceleration upwards will continue as long as the fundamental factors remain unchanged. You can quote me on this.

We don't need dumb number crunching which is what the Amsterdam study is about.


:roll:


What about the scientific basis for climate change? Obviously you failed to read what I said on December 20th. The scientific consensus has moved beyond mere historical statistical analysis. The scientists are building models and testing them. And, integrating inter-disciplinary models. This is big.

So, a Nobel Peace Prize for the IPCC and researchers. But, no Nobel Economics Prize for Shiller.

Eugene Fama (also never won the Nobel Economics Prize) is a far more famous economist than Shiller. Fama offers this critique of Shiller.

"There are some economists who challenge the predictive power of Shiller's publication. Eugene Fama, the Robert R. McCormick Distinguished Service Professor of Finance at The University of Chicago has written that Shiller "has been consistently pessimistic about prices,"[1] so given a long enough horizon, Shiller is bound to be able to claim that he has foreseen any given crisis."


Hope this helps. But, I doubt it.


:roll:
I am yet to have the pleasure of running into anyone more obtuse than yourself.

But, keep it up. Its enjoyable to have Geyser point out your confirmation bias and clear disdain for opposing views.
 
Geyser
Real Estate Talker
Posts: 3569
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2012 5:26 pm
Location: In a van down by the river
Contact:

Re: Climate Warming is coming to BC

Fri Dec 21, 2012 6:59 pm

Jimtan:
The 300-year Amsterdam study is fine as a historical study. I object when you apply it to Vancouver on the Pacific Rim. What's the time horizon we are looking at? I'm looking 5-10 years; not 300 years.
Yep, linear regression forecasting looks very encouraging if you only look at the last decade.
What kinda analysis would be useful for Vancouver. Surely, a classical review of supply and demand offers the best forecast. After all, many factors impact demand; not just income. Acceleration upwards will continue as long as the fundamental factors remain unchanged. You can quote me on this.
News flash! One of the fundamental factors just did change. Demand has recently fallen off a cliff.
We don't need dumb number crunching which is what the Amsterdam study is about.
Yeah! Dumb number crunching only counts when talking about global warming, then it's really important to look back hundreds of years, but don't look at long term RE history because it conflicts with my deeply ingrained, self-serving delusions. :lol:

You are hilarious. :lol:
In fond memory of Taipan, a model of modesty, decency, dignity and tolerance. Long may we all prosper from the tremendous legacy of worldly wisdom and specialized real estate knowledge which he left in the "Arguments" thread.
 
jimtan
Real Estate Talker
Topic Author
Posts: 5514
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 10:59 pm
Contact:

Re: Climate Warming is coming to BC

Sat Dec 22, 2012 12:28 am

I am yet to have the pleasure of running into anyone more obtuse than yourself.

But, keep it up. Its enjoyable to have Geyser point out your confirmation bias and clear disdain for opposing views.
[/quote]


Rofina,

I almost fell off my chair when I read your comments.

First, I respect good opinion, particularly if they are different from mine. Second, your's (metal, westcoast, Geezer etc etc) is not an opposite view. It is wrong opinions based on lack of education, sheer stupidity, lack of research (laziness) and genuine stupidity.

I only need to look at the vacancy numbers and I know that your hopes are fantasies. All that you are doing is quote the brainics at greaterfools. And, try to impress me by cherry picking inappropriate analogies. I am not impressed.

To top it off, the BS on climate change is truly amazing. Thomas posted a link to a letter from '125 renowned scientists' to UN Secretary General. In the letter, reprinted by Financial Post, they claim,

“The U.K. Met Office recently released data showing that there has been no statistically significant global warming for almost 16 years.”

http://opinion.financialpost.com/2012/1 ... cientists/


Yet, a quick visit to the UK Met website produced the chart below. Apparently, global warming has occurred in the last 30 years; with 2000-2009 being the warmest since 1850.

So, is the chart wrong or is something the matter with the authors of the letter.

A casual look at the signatories show that these are not 'renown scientists'. No evidence that any of them are experts on environment sciences. In fact, no explanation of what they mean by statistically significant.

So, is this stupidity or fraud? Does it matter? Does the FP employ idiots as editors, or was the science correspondent on vacation? Does it matter as long as they sell newspapers?
Attachments
UK Met Office Decadal-average-temperatures-ls2.jpg
UK Met Office Decadal-average-temperatures-ls2.jpg (54.42 KiB) Viewed 6399 times
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 99

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests