Have they?
"In this case, their very specific prediction was that warming of between 1.5°C and 4.5°C would accompany a doubling of atmospheric CO₂" https://theconversation.com/40-years-ago-scientists-predicted-climate-change-and-hey-they-were-right-120502
Isn't the problem more that people have been reading that and assuming that it means 3°, not 'possibly 4.5°' ?
That said, the study there seems to assume that the effects are roughly linear, ie. that there are no tipping points.
I don't think the billionaires' investments are going to be worth billions if the global economy collapses.
I don't think China wants that.
What efficient means: switching from ecologically expensive foods like beef to lower impact vegetarian diets.
What efficient does not mean: using vast quantities of fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides.
If organizing multiple riots across the country doesn't count as domestic extremism, what does?
The graph clearly shows that the second half of July was hotter than in 2023 so the next string of record hot months had already begun when they wrote the article. Ridiculous.
It should be the case that we do our part and take in as many refugees as France.
It should be the case that we honour our debts and take in the people that risked their lives to help our troops in Afghanistan.
It should be the case that people stop listening to grifters peddling lies on the internet.
How is their claim not valid if the Home Office allowed it? You think Priti Patel was like "oh, go on then, I'll turn a blind eye just this once" ?
It isn't the case that they have to claim in the first country they come to. That's just misinformation.
If they spoke French, they would probably claim there. France takes more asylum seekers than the UK, so why would they risk their lives? We didn't even take our interpreters from Afghanistan.
You'd think that Nigel Farage would be as informed as anybody on these topics and he's getting his information from Andrew Tate. I repeat: they do not have valid concerns; they are just racists rioting.
Because they have valid claims - 67% of claims in 2023 were successful.
They are not criminals. People who smash gravestones to throw them at policemen, though, they are criminals. We should put them in a prison barge.
You're quoting the statistic about how many people were stopped on landing or shortly afterwards to tell me how they're arriving "unchecked".
Theresa May introduced the Hostile Environment, and Priti Patel made it even more strict. If the Home Office could refuse asylum applications for any reason whatsoever, they would. Despite that, the vast majority of asylum applications are successful.
So they are not cheating the system and they do have the right to be here.
Besides which, how many people do you think we're talking about? Small boats. The clue is in the name. It's not like Dunkirk out there.
I hear what you're saying, but I think the real problem is the policy makers, who are without doubt choosing to use the least scary predictions, and pushing even those targets back when they fail to achieve them.