Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. Vol 3

[robinessex]

PRTVR said:

hidetheelephants said:

LongQ said:

I read recently that most of the gas cows emit is related to belching rather than farting.

Should be interesting stopping that.

I seem to remember reading that you could genetically engineer grass so that it reduced or eliminated cow burps and farts.

Perhaps it would improve if they engineered cows to be meat eaters, it would make it more interesting for walker/ ramblers

Have just seen on the news that the French nuclear workers are going on strike in support of the oil workers, I wonder how the UK will cope if the link is shut down.

ER, fire up all the emergency diesel powered generators we are paying through the nose for ?

[Mr GrimNasty]

It's only 2GW and demand is quite low this time of year, they've been meeting it with mostly nuclear and gas and the odds and sods recently, leaving the coal on idle, which has led to ludicrous claims in the green camp of 'wind/solar outperforming coal', despite them not even making 1% combined a lot of the time - it's like saying I outperformed Usain Bolt after he didn't bother to turn up. As the consequences of the strike are easily foreseen I expect coal will be ready to jump in. Can we stop France taking 2GW back their way though?

[mybrainhurts]

turbobloke said:

mybrainhurts said:

Jacobyte said:

Is there a fart tax yet?

No, John Prescott killed that one. He couldn't afford to pay.

Motto "Save Gas Fart In A Jar"

Jar?

He'd need a bucket...

[turbobloke]

mybrainhurts said:

turbobloke said:

mybrainhurts said:

Jacobyte said:

Is there a fart tax yet?

No, John Prescott killed that one. He couldn't afford to pay.

Motto "Save Gas Fart In A Jar"

Jar?

He'd need a bucket...

If only he was slim and a LibDem - this would be tailor-made.



At least we're still on the political trail

[motco]

I know, I know, it's the Wail but... It's all wrong - the models need a revamp

[Gandahar]

Is there actually any debate on here or is it just a load of people who are not scientists nodding their heads and agreeing with each other?

[turbobloke]

Gandahar said:

Is there actually any debate on here or is it just a load of people who are not scientists nodding their heads and agreeing with each other?

As this is the politics thread, surely you should be discussing the PH group of non-politicians, of which we can presume you're a member? Nod if you agree.

Best wishes etc

A scientist

[Mr GrimNasty]

turbobloke said:

Gandahar said:

Is there actually any debate on here or is it just a load of people who are not scientists nodding their heads and agreeing with each other?

As this is the politics thread, surely you should be discussing the PH group of non-politicians, of which we can presume you're a member? Nod if you agree.

Best wishes etc

A scientist

I was going to ignore the fool - Another scientist, but............

"It is well known that many, if not most, of [the IPCC's] members are not scientists at all." Dr John Christy

"......anyone can apply to be a reviewer of the IPCC Assessment Reports but it seems that this care-free approach has led to the involvement of........ DeSmogBlog.............The evidence shows that the claim of 4000 scientific experts supported the IPCC's claims is dishonest in almost every word. There were not 4000 people, but just under 2900; they were not all scientists; and it seems that they were not all experts. There is only evidence that about 60 people explicitly supported the claim, although that might not mean much given the vested interests and lack of impartiality of many authors and reviewers." John McLean

The CEI v RICO20 gets more hilarious by the hour, your scientist boys are taking one hell of a beating Gandahar!

[Ali G]

PH providing an alternative perspective to that provided by the MSM.

Thought provoking? - yes

Controversial to MSM? - yes

Unscientific? - no

Was Rajendra Pachauri (ex-head of IPCC) a scientist (no), a politician (perhaps), or an abuser of female staff (yes).

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/feb/24...

Parallels between FIFA and IPCC could be drawn through corrupt leaders abusing their position (of trust), and although FIFA concerns are limited to the organised kicking of a pigs bladder around a grassy field by 22 grown men in shorts - the IPCC has a far, far greater remit.

Whilst FIFA comes under increasing scrutiny by FBI et al, IPCC does not.

Wonder why?

[don4l]

Gandahar said:

Is there actually any debate on here or is it just a load of people who are not scientists nodding their heads and agreeing with each other?

Are you a scientist?

[LongQ]

Gandahar said:

Is there actually any debate on here or is it just a load of people who are not scientists nodding their heads and agreeing with each other?

You are posting on the politics thread.

So we observe the politics influencing everything that seems to be happening concerning Climate Change.

Nothing much happening on the Science front at the moment it seems. No one posting over there as far as PH is concerned and just regurgitation of stories about models for political purposes from the media.

In any case, as you well know and have observed before as I recall, there can be little to debate when "the science" is, we are told, settled.

Since so many politicians around the world seem to have found some personal benefit from assuming that supporting the "taking action" on Climate Change meme we should expect then to make noises based on acceptance of the meme for a few years, come what may.

Even if someone produced an paper tomorrow that disproved the concept and it was accepted wholeheartedly by 97% of scientists the political juggernaut would continue. They have too much invested, one way or another, to change direction suddenly.

Nevertheless it is the political front - the "lawmakers" as termed in the USA - that has the primary influence over tax funded and emotionally driven social policy. If we want to even try to understand what is happening around us that is what we need to observe. It's where the action, FUD and controlling efforts are developed and deployed. It will most likely be a growth area of influence for some years.

If you support the infallibility of politicians you may have no need to keep an eye on how political control is developing the meme.

Whether the few identifiable Climate Scientists who are not overtly political in their approach think the political takeover is a good thing seems to be information that is not evidently in the public domain.

Scientists, as a collective, lack the centralised communication machinery on which politics tends to rely. That is probably a good thing - indeed it is as it should be. However it does mean they do not command the floor of any debate that might take place in the long term.

If nothing else Climate Change should be considered to be long term. That is complete anathema to the short-termism naturally inherent in politics. It is from political decisions that we and future generations will benefit or suffer over time. It is rare for political decisions based on poorly understood scientific theories to somehow result in positive outcomes.

We are, of course, very happy to discuss political initiatives and discuss where they may take us. There is really no expectation that Science will be a primary and real influence within a political initiative that truly motivates its objective.

[mybrainhurts]

Gandahar said:

Is there actually any debate on here or is it just a load of people who are not scientists nodding their heads and agreeing with each other?

Nae, laddie, we're just doing it to annoy you....

[robinessex]

Australia removed from UN world heritage climate report

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-36376226

All references to climate change's impact on World Heritage sites in Australia have been removed from a United Nations report.
A draft of the report contained a chapter on the Great Barrier Reef and references to Kakadu and Tasmania.
But Australia's Department of the Environment requested that Unesco scrub these sections from the final version.
A statement from the department said the report could have had an impact on tourism to Australia.

Interesting !!!

[mybrainhurts]

It always was about politics...

[robinessex]

House of Commons - Live Energy and Climate Change Questions

Live coverage of questions in the House of Commons to the energy and climate change secretary Amber Rudd and her ministerial team.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b07b2ns7/hous...

Government bks and out right lies. Labour made a few pointed comments, but the government are totally deluded about renewable. And on just about anything to do with energy and CC., Amber Rudd is a bloody parrot, providing set answers to scripted ‘questions'. The bloody country is doomed if this a window into their thinking.

Edited by robinessex on Monday 30th May 09:47

[turbobloke]

robinessex said:

Government bks and out right lies. Labour made a few pointed comments, but the government are totally deluded about renewable. And on just about anything to do with energy and CC., Amber Rudd is a bloody parrot, providing set answers to scripted ‘questions'. The bloody country is doomed if this a window into their thinking.

Other political Parties aren't shy about joining in. Yesterday a radio news bulletin carried a short babble from the LibDem leader, can't remember his name. He spoke about the need (!) for the UK to pay higher subsidies to renewables and mentioned Germany as a demonstration of achieving 100% renewables. WTF? Being kind, perhaps he imagined he was speaking about some dreamworld target rather than the current reality. Another muppet who makes grandiose pronouncements without knowing the basics e.g. EROEI.

Edited to correct typos after reading about the USA Spelling Bee winners.

Edited by turbobloke on Monday 30th May 13:26

[Mr GrimNasty]

The Germany 100% renewable claim was bks, it was for a short period - but grid figures were later revised, it never happened. And it was only electricity generation, as a fraction of primary energy consumption renewables make a tiny contribution. And people can't afford their energy bills already, and German industry has to have massive subsidies to stay competitive.

That's a really brilliant example to copy isn't it!

[turbobloke]

That sort of thing has been SOP to the LibDims for a while now.

[With these feet]

https://www.energy-charts.de/power.htm

Nice site for Germany's power production. Apologies if its been posted before.

[Mr GrimNasty]

(a) Germany 100% renewables was't true.

https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2016...

(b) It's not something to celebrate anyway, it's a cluster fk.

http://notrickszone.com/2016/05/21/germanys-volati...