Domino

yes, but I have been known to add some extra virgin olive oil to the water
none of the wrappers tell me to add salt when cooking.....
but whatevever makes your mouth zing

oh, and use EVO instead of butter when doing mashed potatoes - but no salt

have a pot of salt in the cupboard that is over 4 years old, last used it to defrost the back pathway last winter.

.

lynnxa

I use olive oil in the pasta too - & I like mash with olive oil & garlic

do you really cook with no herbs or spices at all?

bil

Bingo.

megmet

I love salt and always have but since living in Spain don't eat anywhere near as much of it as I used to do. We both also when in England loved Wensleydale cheese, a few weeks ago some friends brought us some over..... We couldn't believe just how salty it is and we didn't like it at all, I guess our taste buds have changed.

Domino

I have checked and I do have a packet of pasta that says cook gently in "lightly salted water". But I also have a packet that just says water.

and the salt pot is labelled "Safeways" so how old is that ! ?

Domino

so a life changing move in more ways than one.

Dom

rugbymatt

Global warming maybe but definitely not climate change.

bil

What horrifies me is that so many people don't grasp the science behind it. I mean, they seriously haven't got a clue. They don't understand why altho both water vapour and CO2 are a greenhouse gas, increasing CO2 matters, and water doesn't. They don't realise why Methane has more potential to affect the world than CO2.

Far too few grasp why CO2 is a greenhouse gas but not Oxygen. They confuse the terms climate change and global warming, and worst of all they take all this and say that AGW is a lie, that humans have had no effect on global temperature.

We are lucky. No matter how bad it might get, none of us will be around to see the long term effects. Sadly the greens have chosen to go down the route of hysteria, assuring people that global warming is going to destroy the world tommorrow, and everyone can see that that isn't happening, and there is no large scale irrefutable evidence for it. The antis then leap on that as proof positive that everything is just fine as it is.

CO2 has gone from nearly 300 parts per million in 1800 to nearly 400 currently (very approx figures.)

In simple terms, that's like changing a 15 tog duvet for a 20, and when you are no warmer in bed, saying that that is proof positive that duvets don't keep you warm, and the tog system is wrong.

An intelligent person might just think to check the central heating system.

Over the last decade or more, sunspot activity has been falling to an all time low, and this is connected to the sun's temperature. Effectively the sun's thermostat has been turned down, and we have had a reprieve. The extra CO2 is keeping the world at the same temp (more or less) by trapping more heat and turning up the temperature of the earth. The one has more or less cancelled out the effects of the other.

The questions that should be asked are these.

How long before the sun starts to warm up again?

What's going to happen then?

Given that there is more CO2 in the air, there will also be more CO2 in the sea water. How badly will this affect the pH (acidity) of the oceans, and what will that mean for the foodchain, and ultimately, us?

If you don't understand these things, are you fit to comment?

Domino

Sunspots are a temporary phenomena. but have been round for millenia.
Sunspot activity goes in approx 11 year cycles, so after a rapid rise it will have been slowly falling over the following decade. The number of sunspots in the cycle is also cyclic reaching high levels in the first half of the 20th century and falling off over the past 50years or so. It would appear this is similar activity to 8,000 years ago (so it is said).

Sunspots manifest themselves as huge bursts of magnetic activity, frying the delicate control electronics in satellites but also causing problems with communications down on the surface.

Rather than desperately trying to relate man made increases in CO2 to sunspot activity (which IMHO is not possible) try relating mans wars to sunspot activity - you will then see something you don't want to see.

If you don't understand these things, are you fit to comment?

bil

If you can't read what I write, are you fit to comment?

Read again. There is no link to CO2 from sunspots or vice versa. What I said was that the earth's temp has rise, as the sun's has fallen.

The connection to wars is easy.

Changes in the sun's output is related to sunspots. Changes in the sun's output would affect climate and hence crops, crop failures can lead to wars.

jackytoo

Oh gawd...I have opened Pandoras box Wish I hadn't mentioned it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...global_warming

bil

Not your fault someone can't read what I write.

There is a huge difference between saying the world is warmed by human activity (which it is) and that the world is getting hotter.

So many tho can't (or won't) grasp the difference. Basically they have made a religion out of it (as have many greens) and will not tolerate heresy.

jimenato

That's not a long list. I wonder how long a list of scientists supporting the mainstream view would be?

bil

A lot of scientists aren't interested in debating it as the antis don't take the science at the core seriously. I have had some of the actually try and tell me that there was a difference between the Co2 created by humans and the CO2 created by 'natural causes'.

CO2 is apparantly harmless as it is plant food. After I had finished laughing I offered to shut them in a bag half full of water and CO2 since both were harmless.....

Dick Dasterdly

I would say it is quite a long list of apparently well educated and learned scientists and professors, which in any event is incomplete as stated.

Having previously read one or two of them I would say that they have done enough serious studies and brought up sufficient evidence to cast serious doubt on bils feasible but somewhat simplistic mainstream theory.