Don't want to cause a panic but.....

any photo of any place underwater. What is point of this? try somewhere very high up

The site doesn't like my browser apparently. At least I won't have to worry about water levels.

It works in google chrome.
Safe places don't get a picture.
I'm off to Mount Everest when the storms come.

put in the highest place in the city. its under water. walofs?

Im underwater

Just for the record it's called fun....

Do you remember that?
It's what we used to have when life was simple, and before getting screwed up on Betfair!

global warming and sea levels is your idea of fun All places get a picture if it can find them, i put in matterhorn visitor centre

Scare mongering bollox, imo

Usual Aunty Post anti post!

Y-a-w-n!

the land you currently live on is guaranteed to be flooded in the long term future you just wont be around to see it.

In consideration of the billions of years that have created the earth, as we know it, and have passed through "nothingness"
to "The Ice Age" and the dinosaurs, and primates becoming "**** Sapiens", we have to be fortunate to be living in our small time slot,
albeit b*ggered up by ignorance and misguided extremists!

Recent events of drought, and widespread flooding have to be a worry, as these extreme changes have happened in a very short period of time!

"More than 130 severe flood warnings - indicating a threat to life - have been issued since December. In contrast, there were only nine in the whole of 2012".

And it isn't just us, and the regular Asian disasters, but even Australia was seriously flooded last year.

.....can't say "H0MO"

Is this fun too?

My speedboat don't float. I'll call the salesman.

We will now all vote for the Green Party or some other bunch of loonies.

With 'nine' warnings in 2012 and '130' since December.. well WOW - we're on for nearly 2000 next year!!
(or maybe none?)

You have already caused panic, I need to sell my home before 2045 when flood is likely to be regular occurance in my neck of the wood.

We just have to hope Global Warming will not be as bad as predicted

The chance of the human race combining to do any thing about this is approximately zero

I gave up worrying about my carbon footprint when people like Cameron say

we are building a new atomic power station so we don't need any of more of this wind farm thingys

just so the rich do not have their view inconvenienced(we actually need both)

I am also older, so it does not bother me

but I am afraid that is the general attitude

tbh if energy prices do not keep our energy use down, nothing will

I would argue what is driving this is the increase in world population....this is our biggest problem

Only one country so far, China, has made any effort to combat this

More people, means more food is needed, more energy, more resources, more everything is needed

If we don't control ourselves, nature will, people will die,

War, famine, disease, flooding whatever it takes

Nature is only a set of rules, it has no conscience.

Global warming is just the best estimation of scientists projecting current data to the future, There is good chance it will happen but also a chance that it will not happen.

The way to limit population growth is through education, promote human rights (especially for women rights in developing countries) and poverty eradication.

It will not be achieved by telling everybody in the world how many children they should have or not have, How do you policy that unless you want to be draconian and intrusive measures as Chinese government.

If people are educated, they ll educated decision to have one, two or three children they can support . How would you feel if government tell you many children are you allowed to have?

As you have correct observe nature will take care to make sure it support optimum population and no more.

Many people have predict population crisis will happens for the last 500 years including Mandel 100 years ago.

Our Capitalist system does not give wealth to everybody...so eradicating poverty may be harder than you think????

If we do not adopt the Chinese system we may be heading for disaster..bizman

There is no point in encouraging people to use less energy per person, if we produce more people, each with own

energy requirement........these must work together....or we might as well beat our head against a brick wall

for all the good it will do.

Governments tell us what to do anyway....what difference if they tell us how many children we can have..

if it benefits our society as a whole?

No problem, downstairs is under water but I live on the second floor...just need a little boat..sorted

but EG, how do you monitor and making sure people on the developing world use condoms and other means of family planning expect using education?

May 9, 2014 -- 6:13PM, Pounf wrote:

No problem, downstairs is under water but I live on the second floor...just need a little boat..sorted

Personally I think they know how to use a condom.

There is logic in your argument Bizman, as people become wealthier they tend to produce less children....

but how can you make everybody wealthier???????

For the poorer countries, I feel they do need the Chinese approach, India certainly does.

I feel we need more wind farms in this country, on land, not just out at sea.

This will benefit us in the long term, part of the income from things such as fracking, North sea oil etc, must

be used for this, if we have any brains that is

I don't expect us to build them all at once, it is too expensive, but we must commit ourselves to a steady increase here


The problems with our population has been immigration of course, we need some control over it

We have increased our own population too quickly, we must slow down.

My nan wouldn't let my dad buy her flat.

She's condemned us to a watery grave

No panic caused.

They might know how to use condom but they might not want to use it, due lack of education or because they actually need more children to work on farms and business. It might be simple equation to them, more children equal better life.

The world today is better off than 100 or even 30 years ago. Despite all the problems standard of living, awareness and level of education is better than 100 years ago all over the world.

I agree UK need to have better control immigration and increase indigenous population but to do that you need to entice people with better child care services.

Working class tends to respond quickly to these incentives while middle class tend to resent it as is too little for them.

I don't how you can get the balance right to all income groups and all class of society at the same time making sure it is not big burden to the country.

The world is certainly better than 100 years ago, as regards our standard of living. 30 years ago, little difference, in my opinion,

in fact I would argue worse in some places, bizman.

China are easing their one child policy, so it does not need to be permanent.

It is an option, when needs must. Unless some countries control their populations, their is little hope that they

will ever reach the standard of living, where they choose not to have more children, in fact control it themselves.

My original point was, there is no point in trying to persuade people to use less energy, if we keep producing more people,

it would not get us anywhere. So control of our energy use, is tied to control of our population.

or we crack the 'Nuclear Fusion' problem

our get out jail free card, well as regards energy

get out of jail free card