4 years left

[ace00]

The planet will be in "huge trouble" unless Barack Obama makes strides in tackling climate change, says a leading scientist.

Prof James McCarthy spoke on the eve of the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), which he heads.

The US president has just four years to save the planet, said Prof McCarthy.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7885036.stm

No comment really. Been nice knowing you. Time to be with loved ones I guess, before we all die in 2012/13

[Cyberman]

Utter bollocks!!!

[Bagpuss]

48 hours to save the planet works, 4 years, can't see it getting the punters in

[PM-Junkie]

Complete carp - Prince Gordo saved the planet three months ago.

[zeitghost]

Yup.

The Aztec/Inca/some southern Amerindian calendar only went as far as 2012.

Now we know why...

[ratewhore]

Not much point in me getting an offset mortgage then is there?

[Jubber]

Yup.

The Aztec/Inca/some southern Amerindian calendar only went as far as 2012.

Now we know why...

Is that when the Mothership is going to return and put us all out of our misery?

[PM-Junkie]

Is that when the Mothership is going to return and put us all out of our misery?

The mother ship is already here - it knocked down two satellites yesterday, remember?

[Doggy Styles]

This is terrible news. How am I going to pay off all my debts in such a short space of time?

[Svalbaard]

What a load of old codswallop.

I swear in 500 years time the inhabitants of Earth will be looking at this current bunch of scared pathetic little humans in their history lessons and laughing their collective arses off at how we thought ourselves so clever as to be able to manipulate the building blocks of life, but allowed ourselves to be manipulated by the corporations and governments into coughing up even more money to perpetuate this eco-fraud that we are currently being subjected to.

Not a popular opinion I agree. But I've still yet to see a single shred of categorical evidence that climate change is due to the effects of mankinds activities and not just another of the many natural shifts in the Earths climate that I think have more than likely affected our planet over it's 4 billion year history. But hey, forget good science - it's simply not profitable is ut?

I can see the argument for renewable energy. What I can't see though is the argument for GM crops to feed the rapidly expanding population, as a cull of all the chavs round my way would be a good start and could if successful lead eventually to a global cull of all chavs - a project I would be more than happy to lead BTW.

As Sir Bill of Hicks so eloquently put it "it's not like we'd lose a cure for cancer."

Flame away...