Climate Cat out of the Bag? Potentially dynamite revelations
Discussion
Mr Whippy said:
Not sure what the real motive is, but the whole thing is just contradictory... Weird!
Motive for whom? Mr Gore makes millions out of carbon trading, so money for him.
The Govt makes billions out of tax, so money for them.
The scientists get more funding, so money for them (though in the case of some of the scientists it does appear to be motivated by a desire to redistribute wealth as well).
esselte said:
ludo said:
Short term (i.e. decadal) trends are unstable and don't tell you much about long term climate change.
What,in your opinion,would be catagorised as "long term"..how many years...? 
Lots of bandwagon jumping for idealists seeking the means to impose their ideas.
How heat resistant is your bladder?
http://www.climatejustice.org.uk/about/
How heat resistant is your bladder?
http://www.climatejustice.org.uk/about/
srebbe64 said:
Can't believe this hasn't been posted but this person talketh sense:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgaeyMa3jyU&fea...
Sensible view on AGW! I'd almost given up hope.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgaeyMa3jyU&fea...
Jasandjules said:
Mr Whippy said:
Not sure what the real motive is, but the whole thing is just contradictory... Weird!
Motive for whom? Mr Gore makes millions out of carbon trading, so money for him.
The Govt makes billions out of tax, so money for them.
The scientists get more funding, so money for them (though in the case of some of the scientists it does appear to be motivated by a desire to redistribute wealth as well).
CO2 is the enemy nec plus ultra and indeed par excellence that would have served very nicely for redistribution of wealth, and a new world order. Fortunately, that wease is withering.
Dr Jekyll said:
srebbe64 said:
Can't believe this hasn't been posted but this person talketh sense:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgaeyMa3jyU&fea...
Sensible view on AGW! I'd almost given up hope.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgaeyMa3jyU&fea...
The BBC could learn a lot from it.
Diderot said:
And remember it's also an 'easy' way to render the Middle East (ie. OPEC) medieval; shaft Russia, Malaysia and other 'problematic' states who don't see eye to eye with 'us' but supply us with gas, coal and oil.
And this is where i get confused. If we use less fuel, surely they will just put their prices up. We still need it!"Climategate: Green activist attacks half the electorate as lunatic Right-wing conspiracy theorists"
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100...
"Want to know why most British voters are unconvinced by the Rio-Kyoto-Copenhagen crowd? Read this.( http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/... )
Joss Garman, who co-founded the pressure group Plane Stupid, rails at the “undiluted lunacy” of the conservative movement. We Rightists, he says, have concocted a conspiracy theory that is imperilling the planet. We apparently believe that scientists and governments are deliberately, maliciously and secretly falsifying climate change data.
“I find it extraordinary that the Conservatives Andrew Tyrie and Daniel Hannan, James Delingpole of The Daily Telegraph and Fraser Nelson of The Spectator have gambled their reputations on a conspiracy theory supported by the flimsiest of evidence.”
The others he names will, no doubt, speak for themselves. My own views on climate change are summarised here. As you will see, far from alleging a conspiracy, I wrote the following:
“It isn’t a conspiracy. Reading the leaked emails, it seems pretty clear that their authors genuinely believe that the world is getting hotter as a result of human activity.”
I went on to say that I, too, thought that the world was warming, and that human activity might well be playing a part in the process. I simply wondered whether there were cheaper and more effective strategies than spending hundreds of billions of pounds on a scheme which, even according to its most evangelical supporters, will slow the heating process only slightly. “It ought to be possible,” I concluded, “to accept the case for global warming – and, indeed, for an anthropogenic component therein – while still believing that the Rio-Kyoto-Copenhagen agenda represents a misallocation of resources.”
This, in Garman’s eyes, makes me a “denier”, the moral equivalent of a Holocaust denier. You don’t think that’s his implication? Then read the next bit of his article: “The Daily Express front page last week, headlined ‘The Big Climate Change Fraud’… will appear in exhibitions in years to come alongside the Daily Mail headline of the Thirties – ‘Hurrah for the Blackshirts’”.
But what exactly am I supposed to be denying? That the world is warming? No. That we are over-dependent on fossil fuels? No. That we ought to reduce the pollutants we pump into the air – including carbon dioxide? No. All I deny is that supporters of the proposed emissions targets have a monopoly of wisdom.
If Garman’s purpose is simply to attack the Right, fair enough. But if he wants to win people over on the issue of climate change, he’s going about it in a very strange way. I mean, when I see that he’s fibbing about me, I’m commensurately less likley to believe what he says about, say, Arctic sea ice.
No wonder so few voters are persuaded: most people can spot self-serving, contradictory and hysterical arguments when they hear them. Attacking the unconvinced, rather than coming up with better arguments, isn’t just bad tactics; it’s plain stupid."
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100...
"Want to know why most British voters are unconvinced by the Rio-Kyoto-Copenhagen crowd? Read this.( http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/... )
Joss Garman, who co-founded the pressure group Plane Stupid, rails at the “undiluted lunacy” of the conservative movement. We Rightists, he says, have concocted a conspiracy theory that is imperilling the planet. We apparently believe that scientists and governments are deliberately, maliciously and secretly falsifying climate change data.
“I find it extraordinary that the Conservatives Andrew Tyrie and Daniel Hannan, James Delingpole of The Daily Telegraph and Fraser Nelson of The Spectator have gambled their reputations on a conspiracy theory supported by the flimsiest of evidence.”
The others he names will, no doubt, speak for themselves. My own views on climate change are summarised here. As you will see, far from alleging a conspiracy, I wrote the following:
“It isn’t a conspiracy. Reading the leaked emails, it seems pretty clear that their authors genuinely believe that the world is getting hotter as a result of human activity.”
I went on to say that I, too, thought that the world was warming, and that human activity might well be playing a part in the process. I simply wondered whether there were cheaper and more effective strategies than spending hundreds of billions of pounds on a scheme which, even according to its most evangelical supporters, will slow the heating process only slightly. “It ought to be possible,” I concluded, “to accept the case for global warming – and, indeed, for an anthropogenic component therein – while still believing that the Rio-Kyoto-Copenhagen agenda represents a misallocation of resources.”
This, in Garman’s eyes, makes me a “denier”, the moral equivalent of a Holocaust denier. You don’t think that’s his implication? Then read the next bit of his article: “The Daily Express front page last week, headlined ‘The Big Climate Change Fraud’… will appear in exhibitions in years to come alongside the Daily Mail headline of the Thirties – ‘Hurrah for the Blackshirts’”.
But what exactly am I supposed to be denying? That the world is warming? No. That we are over-dependent on fossil fuels? No. That we ought to reduce the pollutants we pump into the air – including carbon dioxide? No. All I deny is that supporters of the proposed emissions targets have a monopoly of wisdom.
If Garman’s purpose is simply to attack the Right, fair enough. But if he wants to win people over on the issue of climate change, he’s going about it in a very strange way. I mean, when I see that he’s fibbing about me, I’m commensurately less likley to believe what he says about, say, Arctic sea ice.
No wonder so few voters are persuaded: most people can spot self-serving, contradictory and hysterical arguments when they hear them. Attacking the unconvinced, rather than coming up with better arguments, isn’t just bad tactics; it’s plain stupid."
Edited by chris watton on Sunday 6th December 20:24
Edited by chris watton on Sunday 6th December 20:24
Hedders said:
Diderot said:
And remember it's also an 'easy' way to render the Middle East (ie. OPEC) medieval; shaft Russia, Malaysia and other 'problematic' states who don't see eye to eye with 'us' but supply us with gas, coal and oil.
And this is where i get confused. If we use less fuel, surely they will just put their prices up. We still need it!
ked than if they'd been 'air striked' to bits by the usual suspects. Ultimately it's all about oil - Gulf wars, afghanistan, gloopal wombling. These things are inextricably intertwined.
Diderot said:
Ultimately it's all about oil - Gulf wars, afghanistan, gloopal wombling. These things are inextricably intertwined.
Don't get me wrong, I do believe you. I just can't get my head round it. I can see that in a few years we will be using less fuel but paying much more for it. I guess the extra monay will be going to our government and not theirs?Hedders said:
Diderot said:
Ultimately it's all about oil - Gulf wars, afghanistan, gloopal wombling. These things are inextricably intertwined.
Don't get me wrong, I do believe you. I just can't get my head round it. I can see that in a few years we will be using less fuel but paying much more for it. I guess the extra monay will be going to our government and not theirs?srebbe64 said:
Can't believe this hasn't been posted but this person talketh sense:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgaeyMa3jyU&fea...
Good video. Thanks for sharing.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgaeyMa3jyU&fea...
It seems a pity that we didn't have sombody like that in charge of the CRU.
Don
--
Hedders said:
Diderot said:
And remember it's also an 'easy' way to render the Middle East (ie. OPEC) medieval; shaft Russia, Malaysia and other 'problematic' states who don't see eye to eye with 'us' but supply us with gas, coal and oil.
And this is where i get confused. If we use less fuel, surely they will just put their prices up. We still need it!If we use less fuel, then prices will go down.
Did you vote Labour at the last election?
Don
--
Jasandjules said:
Bing o said:
some tt in a blog said:
t in a blog said: That we ought to reduce the pollutants we pump into the air – including carbon dioxide?
FFSThis has worked with other religious sects, hasn't it..?
...Just call me Mr EvilIf The climate is changing, through no input of man, but through natural events is it going to be such a bad thing ?
It will not happen overnight like in that film "the day after tomorrow" it will happen over time, we humans can adapt, move, and use it to our advantage. the populace will not adopt a King Canute stance and sit there while our worldly good float away before drowning.
Maybe a change in climate is a natural way to support a growing population, more fertile growing lands, longer growing seasons, move the population away from the areas that have been traditionally poor at growing crops, perhaps its even a population reduction mechanism in the survival of the fittest tradition that is favoured in nature.
outfits like "plane stupid" calling me a denier is not going to help, Al Gore reaping millions while I live in tax hell in a terraced house is not going to make me commit to any cause.
In fact they can all fk off. stop telling me what i am you s, I am not putting up with two faced politicians jetting off to copenhagen to talk about how they can get me to stop driving and make me turn my heating down a few notches, especially since those politicians will be eating 5 star meals served in luxurious surroundings and will be riding first class throughout the tax funded event.
Bring on the warming, bring on any change, i am not going to care a single jot, rain, floods, snow, i just dont care, The stress of dealing with tts labelling me and telling me i am wrong for questioning motives and wanting to get a balanced view on events before commiting to a firm opinion is far more damaging to my sanity that change will ever be, what is the worst that will happen ? we die, big fking deal, we all die anyway.
NO, I am going to rip the head off the next fker who calls me a denier to my face, then i am going to twist the mixture rich on the V8 carb and find a few environmentaists to do burnouts in front of while shouting "hide this decline fkers"
It will not happen overnight like in that film "the day after tomorrow" it will happen over time, we humans can adapt, move, and use it to our advantage. the populace will not adopt a King Canute stance and sit there while our worldly good float away before drowning.
Maybe a change in climate is a natural way to support a growing population, more fertile growing lands, longer growing seasons, move the population away from the areas that have been traditionally poor at growing crops, perhaps its even a population reduction mechanism in the survival of the fittest tradition that is favoured in nature.
outfits like "plane stupid" calling me a denier is not going to help, Al Gore reaping millions while I live in tax hell in a terraced house is not going to make me commit to any cause.
In fact they can all f
k off. stop telling me what i am you s, I am not putting up with two faced politicians jetting off to copenhagen to talk about how they can get me to stop driving and make me turn my heating down a few notches, especially since those politicians will be eating 5 star meals served in luxurious surroundings and will be riding first class throughout the tax funded event.Bring on the warming, bring on any change, i am not going to care a single jot, rain, floods, snow, i just dont care, The stress of dealing with t
ts labelling me and telling me i am wrong for questioning motives and wanting to get a balanced view on events before commiting to a firm opinion is far more damaging to my sanity that change will ever be, what is the worst that will happen ? we die, big fking deal, we all die anyway.NO, I am going to rip the head off the next f
ker who calls me a denier to my face, then i am going to twist the mixture rich on the V8 carb and find a few environmentaists to do burnouts in front of while shouting "hide this decline fkers"Edited by Getragdogleg on Sunday 6th December 22:12
Getragdogleg said:
NO, I am going to rip the head off the next fker who calls me a denier to my face, then i am going to twist the mixture rich on the V8 carb and find a few environmentaists to do burnouts in front of while shouting "hide this decline fkers"
Don't forget to have this filmed.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff