Armchair Critic,

The "guys" are not going to "read the things (you) post" if you call them "thickheads"; this is not a battle ground, it's a discussion forum. The "thickheads" know that it's not about climate change, it's about freedom of speech, yes, and a world government, run by a few un-elected maniacs. Why do you think I brought it up! The "thickheads" also know that the Left trolls here approve of such things, and you would be wasting your time trying to convince them of anything. They are best ignored, but don't get bitter and nasty: just keep expressing your opinions. That's all any off us can do. Who knows what monitoring of sites such as this will result in?

@tbbn
You have taken the Telegraph's article at face value without having a closer look at the actual presentation (see SteeleRedux's link in his post)
As I am familiar with Sands's work on International Law I was more than a little surprised at the assumptions that people were making. If you ever get the chance read his book Lawless World where he highlights the way International Law has evolved since 1945 has been to reduce national sovereignty. The lecture highlights the fact that the nations that are at most risk from climate change are those which have effectively made no contribution to the problem and are least well placed to address problems created by climate change. Yet under current law these nations have no right to any form of redress because our international law is weighted in favour of the richer nations.
So why did the telegraph run the story? read Klein's This Changes Everything - she documents that there is a well funded campaign to spread disinformation; it worked for a long time with smoking and at this stage is working with respect to CO2.

Dear Armchaircritic and ttbn,

This is where I do question if you both live in an alternative universe.

Let's cut to the chase.

You have presented us with an opinion piece, manufactured from a lie, written a bloke who has a long track record of having his ample proboscis so far up the fundamental orifice of big business that to suspect he is capable of regurgitating anything but the crap they are putting out is fanciful, yet somehow you seem content to completely ignore the bleeding obvious and instead babble on about world government conspiracy?

What the hell?

Unless the case can be made that this predisposition is genetic we have to assume you are both being wilfully delusional.

The question is why?

The Global warming nuts are coming out of the woodwork now.

Flooding the system: Climate change could knock the Internet offline

Story at.
http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2015/10/12/climate-change-internet-offline.html

Phillip S - have you actually bothered to read the link you provided or just the headline?
If I just saw the headline I probably would not have bothered to read further but when you read on it is clear that this is not some deluded raving.
Forget about anthropomorphic climate change - not relevant in this context. All that you need to take on board that the climate is changing; whether that is man made or natural is irrelevant here. It is even irrelevant whether or not we can stop climate change or not. In fact as far as the article is concerned the points it raises are relevant regardless of whether or not climate change is real or an illusion.
The point he is making is very simple. In the 21st century we are increasingly dependent on communication. If that infrastructure is disabled be it by a natural event or even a terrorist attack we are suddenly in a very different world. All the systems that we have built rely on modern communications knock that out and we find that the knock on effect will be enormous.
Sorry to say but the problem he is describing is real regardless of climate change.

BAYGON Quote "Sorry to say but the problem he is describing is real regardless of climate change"

Exactly as I said the nuts are blaming things on Global warming in that case sensationalizing it as a headline.