Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. Vol 2

[LongQ]

wc98 said:

wtf http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/07/...
if anyone ever needed just one reason to vote ukip,there it is.

article says :Figures are just out disclosing the millions of taxpayers' money the European Union paid in 2013 to unelected, unaccountable non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and other special interest groups, especially to the "global warming" lobby.
One of the most disturbing figures is the amount the EU paid the BBC -- €6,100,987 (£4,854,039) a sum in addition to the €24.4m (£19.4) in grants the EU paid the BBC between 2007-2012.
Grants to the green anti-industrial lobby included multi-millions to Friends of the Earth €4,188,230 (£3,332,220), WWF €5,344,641 (£4,252,279) and the RSPB €3,802,544 (£3,024,327).

And then there is the US based "charity" World Resources Institute which seems to be recieiving dosh from all directions, even other charities, for work on "designing the 2015 global climate change agreement".

Interestingly it seems it is also funded by Big Oil.

"Not to be left out, we also see the UK's aid ministry, DFID give $2,041,246 to WRI, adding to our contribution via the EU, while the FCO tops up the funding with another $240,351. Including our contribution via the EU, that brings the UK total to about €2.5 million.

Interestingly, Big Oil is right in there as well, with the Shell Foundation contributing $1,000,000, topped up by the Shell Oil Company USA with another $350,000. Other corporates are represented, with the United Technologies Corporation giving $300,000, FedEx, $850,000, KPMG East Africa Limited giving $865,390, McKinsey & Company, Inc, $270,000 and Goldman Sachs $250,000. "

For the full gory read go here:

http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=8...

[hidetheelephants]

LongQ said:

Why do we still have a parliament? It is becoming quite clear that the NGOs make all the important decisions and will accept no 'disrespect'.

http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=8...

"Without even beginning to understand why it should be so wrong, the Independent is waxing indignant about Owen Paterson turning down "the offer" of a briefing on climate change from Julia Slingo, the Met Office's chief scientist."


Later .....

"But the fact that he did not, and that his insubordination has been reported by the Independent, is another part of the story. With the story being revealed by way of a Freedom of Information (FoI) request, this itself reveals a deadly battle being played out at the heart of government.

Highly placed entryists, within the various ministries, are charged with observing the behaviour of disobedient and free-thinking ministers, and reporting their deviations to a tightly-knit group of full-time activists employed by big-name NGOs, mostly in the animal welfare and environmental camps, where there is seamless planning and coordination.

The insiders, thus tip their handlers as to what FoI questions should be asked, which are then farmed out to anonymous proxies – who launch a volley of Exocets at the heart of government, the intention being to destabilise and weaken dissident ministers, and keep them in check."



So much for democracy - if we ever had such a thing.

That's fking sedition; they ought to be locked in the bloody tower.

[turbobloke]

It's our money being handed out to these misguided zealots which makes it even 'better'.

[LongQ]

A wind of change in Wales?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-282294...

BBC says this:
"A wind turbine which cost the taxpayer £48,000 and generated an average of just £5 worth of electricity per month is being removed."

Later the piece suggests that the removal is not so much because the thing is totally useless so much as that the company who supplied it went out of business and they are unlikely to find anyone who can maintain it for the next several hundred years it would take to recoup its costs.


Government finances at all levels are clearly not influenced by people with any common sense or provable fiscal ability.

Edited by LongQ on Thursday 10th July 11:52

[chris watton]

LongQ said:

A wind of change in Wales?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-282294...
this
BBC says:
"A wind turbine which cost the taxpayer £48,000 and generated an average of just £5 worth of electricity per month is being removed."

Later the piece suggests that the removal is not so much because the thing is totally useless so much as that the company who supplied it went out of business and they are unlikely to find anyone who can maintain it for the next several hundred years it would take to recoup its costs.


Government finances at all levels are clearly not influenced by people with any common sense or provable fiscal ability.

That to me is a microcosm of the whole mentality of this scam - it's akin to setting fire to billions of tax payers and borrowed money. Complete madness.

[dickymint]

chris watton said:

LongQ said:

A wind of change in Wales?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-282294...
this
BBC says:
"A wind turbine which cost the taxpayer £48,000 and generated an average of just £5 worth of electricity per month is being removed."

Later the piece suggests that the removal is not so much because the thing is totally useless so much as that the company who supplied it went out of business and they are unlikely to find anyone who can maintain it for the next several hundred years it would take to recoup its costs.


Government finances at all levels are clearly not influenced by people with any common sense or provable fiscal ability.

That to me is a microcosm of the whole mentality of this scam - it's akin to setting fire to billions of tax payers and borrowed money. Complete madness.

Wonder how much that will cost us to remove? Maybe keep the concrete plinth and stick this on ....

[LongQ]

Guam said:

Greenpeace just cant lego of AGW and Big oil memes

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2687431/Gr...

I wonder if they will make another video about the World Resources Institute taking Shell Oil money ... (see post a few above ...)

[wc98]

LongQ said:

And then there is the US based "charity" World Resources Institute which seems to be recieiving dosh from all directions, even other charities, for work on "designing the 2015 global climate change agreement".

Interestingly it seems it is also funded by Big Oil.

"Not to be left out, we also see the UK's aid ministry, DFID give $2,041,246 to WRI, adding to our contribution via the EU, while the FCO tops up the funding with another $240,351. Including our contribution via the EU, that brings the UK total to about €2.5 million.

Interestingly, Big Oil is right in there as well, with the Shell Foundation contributing $1,000,000, topped up by the Shell Oil Company USA with another $350,000. Other corporates are represented, with the United Technologies Corporation giving $300,000, FedEx, $850,000, KPMG East Africa Limited giving $865,390, McKinsey & Company, Inc, $270,000 and Goldman Sachs $250,000. "

For the full gory read go here:

http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=8...

thanks for the link . it supports the idea the whole meme is nowt but a tool for the establishment to screw as much as they can out of us. the climate "scientists" ( would they fk be working in the climate field if they were any good and could get a job in the private sector) and we are all going to burn placard waving morons are but useful idiots.

[wc98]

Mr GrimNasty said:

I worked at Heathrow, you could cook an egg on mid-winters day if the sun came out. It's all the concrete. Everything is concrete.

For the record, at my location in Sussex, July 2013 started very cool 15-19C, had several weeks of warm weather 22-27C, then finished cool to average 19-21C.

Certainly nothing special.

I think the definition of heatwave has become somewhat abused and headlines distorted with urban temperatures, like the ridiculous transient temperatures reported in Australia last year caused by all the superheated air from the cities. It's nothing to do with CO2 induced global warming. It's everything to do with urbanization which produces dramatic 'heatwaves' that simply would not exist in a green field/forest on the same site.

as it gets colder we will indeed have to redefine the term heatwave ,just the same as increased global snow and ice is a signal of human induced warming

[mybrainhurts]

Guam said:

Fenbeagle with some class artwork

http://fenbeagleblog.wordpress.com/2014/07/09/thin...

H/T to Tallbloke!

....Lord P P P Prescott The Penguin...Who Blairs Spins

Superb...

[Beati Dogu]

Guam said:

Greenpeace just cant lego of AGW and Big oil memes

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2687431/Gr...

It's high time Greenpeace lost their charitable status in this country. They're a political pressure group and that's why they lost it in New Zealand in 2011 and in Canada (where they were founded) as far back as 1989.

[LongQ]

wc98 said:

LongQ said:

And then there is the US based "charity" World Resources Institute which seems to be recieiving dosh from all directions, even other charities, for work on "designing the 2015 global climate change agreement".

Interestingly it seems it is also funded by Big Oil.

"Not to be left out, we also see the UK's aid ministry, DFID give $2,041,246 to WRI, adding to our contribution via the EU, while the FCO tops up the funding with another $240,351. Including our contribution via the EU, that brings the UK total to about €2.5 million.

Interestingly, Big Oil is right in there as well, with the Shell Foundation contributing $1,000,000, topped up by the Shell Oil Company USA with another $350,000. Other corporates are represented, with the United Technologies Corporation giving $300,000, FedEx, $850,000, KPMG East Africa Limited giving $865,390, McKinsey & Company, Inc, $270,000 and Goldman Sachs $250,000. "

For the full gory read go here:

http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=8...

thanks for the link . it supports the idea the whole meme is nowt but a tool for the establishment to screw as much as they can out of us. the climate "scientists" ( would they fk be working in the climate field if they were any good and could get a job in the private sector) and we are all going to burn placard waving morons are but useful idiots.

There are plenty of highly intelligent people who seem to come to the conclusion that they know what is best on a social basis and anything that allows them some form of influence over outcomes must be pursued as a matter of principle. Some find personal wealth along the way. Others are not quite so lucky but are usually happy enough to be reasonably well recompensed for doing something that they feel a need to do anyway.

The problem comes when society stops functioning on a suitable level of balance and starts to disintegrate into ever more forceful and self interested factions, becoming so self centred and inward looking that the next evolution of marauding "Barbarians" can walk in and disrupt whatever they find unchallenged.

It takes far longer to build something than it does to knock it down. I fear that many people will rediscover that for themselves in the next decade or so.

[mybrainhurts]

LongQ said:

It takes far longer to build something than it does to knock it down.

It's taking forever to knock this crap down, though....

[LongQ]

mybrainhurts said:

LongQ said:

It takes far longer to build something than it does to knock it down.

It's taking forever to knock this crap down, though....

Ah, true.

A bit like planning permission really. A process that can drag on for a long time with a perpetual series of changes along the way and, often, the end result being nothing like what was proposed in the original scheme.

I don't think you can knock down a concept that keeps shifting. However it seems that it is possible for a concept to be used to undermine an existing structure through the medium of fear.

Terrorism works that way, punching well above its weight (to use a current phrase that helps to maintain the concept destruction of the strong by the weak.)

[turbobloke]

And yet with the unfeasibly large amount of our taxes (UK and EU), plus money from politically motivated corporates and misguided zillionaires, the tide has definitely turned over the last few years.

It was quite a high tide to turn around, manmade as in made up, and worse than previously thought - it came close to flooding the planet with its flotsam and jetsam of junk and bunk, but it's turned.

Politicians are more arrogant than most and more allergic to egg on face but they're spinning against the tide now.

[turbobloke]

BBC In Deep Water Over Climate Change Censorship Row

The BBC Is Scared Of Nigel Lawson – And It’s Right To Be

The BBC is getting itself in a huge hole over its coverage of climate change – and it does not seem to see the need to stop digging. The danger comes from self-censorship. Which editor now is going to invite Lord Lawson or even Prof Bob Carter on to their programmes in the certain knowledge that they are likely to be criticised and perhaps have time-consuming complaints upheld against them? As Lord Lawson argues, surely correctly, he has, in effect, been banned by the BBC. It is an easy thing to judge. Let’s see when he next appears in the climate change context.

Raymond Snoddy, MediaTel, 09 July 2014


The fact is that, on the climate change issue, the BBC has its own party line (indistinguishable from that of the Green Party) which it imposes with quasi-Stalinist thoroughness. It is hard to imagine a more blatant breach of its charter, which commits it to political balance, or a more blatant betrayal of the people’s trust, on which the continuation of its licence fee depends.

Nigel Lawson, Daily Mail, 09 July 2014

[steveatesh]

More steps towards telling us all how to run our lives. Mail link but also reported in the telegraph.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2689547/Bu...

Article tells us all we should be buying smaller TVs and fridges. It's the Middle Classes to blame apparently

[chris watton]

I thought it was only people on benefits who could afford large TV's and humongous fridges to store their pizzas and Lidl cider!

[dandarez]

steveatesh said:

More steps towards telling us all how to run our lives. Mail link but also reported in the telegraph.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2689547/Bu...

Article tells us all we should be buying smaller TVs and fridges. It's the Middle Classes to blame apparently

Nicola Terry, the study’s co-author, said:
‘Why do we need a bigger TV, and why do we need a bigger fridge? I don’t understand ... ’

'course you don't luv, that's because you're like our climate ...wet (behind the ears).
I could put even more blunt: something, something, something plank.

A 'bigger' or better, bloody huge TV (or projector - the future) makes it more like being in the cinema, so you don't need to go as often as perhaps you once did. And there's the added bonus of not having a git like you sat in front of me, ballooning as you're downing a gallon of Coke and crunching a massive 'bucket' of bloody pop corn for an hour and a half, thus ruining my enjoyment. Plus I've saved on the ticket and the fuel and the parking (although not in my case here as we have free parking).

A 'larger' or better, 'huge' Fridge (freezer) has the added bonus of being able to store more. Is it really that difficult to comprehend?
Plus it saves you money again. Larger freezer allows bulk purchasing of reduced sell-by-date goods. Just one simple example, we get through lots of bread - pile of the best £1.75 loaves were reduced to 25p on SBD, bought the lot, into the freezer same day and they're good for up to a month. No more 'Oh f. we haven't got any bread left'. Amazing what you can freeze on sell by date, milk, butter, fish, loads of stuff. IF you have the room in a 'larger' fridge freezer.

Nah, get yourself a incy-wincy tiny fridge and a dinky little tv.
Then spend more time going out, wasting fuel, paying parking charges, buying your items at top whack price, and then not forgetting all that squinting trying to view your dinky tv, suffer the consequence of more time going out ... visiting specsavers!

Climate idiots.

[Jasandjules]

dandarez said:

‘Why do we need a bigger TV, and why do we need a bigger fridge? I don’t understand ... ’

Quite right. And when I see the BBC studios with no lights on (save that Co2), and no support for the World Cup (which involves huge travel for thousands of people and lots of lights used, so much CO2), and not sending 30 odd employees down there to cover it (again lots of Co2), and no support for the Olympics, Tennis, Athletics or any other sporting event which must generate huge carbon dioxides for the lighting and heating and travel of the competitors and audience, and the BBC with no TVs themselves and so on

THEN I'll consider it isn't a load of s**t.