Climate change - the POLITICAL debate.

[mybrainhurts]

Devil2575 said:

How do you know that he is not just spinning you a line?

We don't know if you've been sent here to disrupt things. But that doesn't matter.

[turbobloke]

Devil2575 said:

Which gets back to why I want to know who he is. You should too.

What makes you think others don't know? Plenty know plenty. Once upon a time when all this around here were nothing but fields and global warming, my profile carried all sorts of information. Also, many PHers will recall the last time somebody less polite than you paid close attention to my inside leg and other credentials, and having responded then I'm not minded to repeat the episode every time a relative newbie gets a bit agw-curious. Suffice to say, as I already said, I'm not involved in any of the climate scams as a paid lackey and as to anything relating to the validity or accuracy of post content, make your own mind up.

You must appreciate the unwelcome attention that gets directed at the unbelievers, and I've had more than enough and so has my family since the cowardly greenslime who indulge in such tactics go ott for starters.

Not that this involved me directly but have you seen what the BWEA did on the interweb to people who dared, shock horror, to write to newspapers pointing out the many inadequacies of subsidised but pointless and hideously expensive windymills?





I've removed surnames which were given in the original web versions. IIRC the police were involved in that one. In this thread it's all about this politicised delinquency and not about me, over in the science thread it's all about discussing the agw junkscience. Way back, I was tempted to join PH due to having 5-star leaded in my veins, replying to the pile of carp being posted on junkscience and the politics based around it came later.

[dickymint]

deeps said:

Walkers replied...

Dear Mr Deeps

Thank you very much for your recent email. We are sorry to hear that you do not agree with our carbon footprint data.

We are always very happy to receive consumer feedback and please be assured that I have forwarded your comments on to our Marketing Team for their attention.

Thank you very much for your enquiry. We place enormous value on the views of our consumers.

Regards

Jill Heath
Customer Services

Not even a free box of crisps!

[turbobloke]

Guam said:

Drop this aspect and move on.

Excellent timely intervention and to prove just how incorruptible we are around here, a cheque is in the post. Clearly that was just my devilish sense of humour.

[dickymint]

CBR JGWRR said:

Devil2575 said:

PRTVR said:

But why do you need to know?

Not need, want to know.

Why? I haven't read the whole thread by any stretch. It would take hours and I don't have the time. However it would appear that most of the information is comming from Turbobloke. Ok other people are linking some political blogs etc connected to opposition to MMGW but the last time I looked Turbobloke was in essence the main driving force behind information.
Given this fact I'd like to know who i'm talking too. Is he just some bloke who like spouting off, is he a well respected scientist or his he connected to a political party/lobby group. It matters.

No idea, but he has a red MR2, which is a good sign he isn't one of Them.

Are you sure? Red MR2 makes him a hairdresser at least!

[Jaged]

Devil2575 said:

Not need, want to know.

Why? I haven't read the whole thread by any stretch.

Devil - I very rarely post on this or the Science threads, but when I have, TB, Guam and others have always taken the time to answer my questions.

I have read all these pages and all the Science threads!!! Yes it would takes months to catch up.

So I can honestly say TB and the others have only ever given information and explanation that CAN be verified.

They have also debated the issues over and over again when someone new pops in and asks yet again the same questions.

I suspect there are a lot of "readers" like myself who have followed up on the information provided.

If you have not read "The Hockey Stick Illusion" a book that TB pointed me too, then I recommend you do, as that Hockey Stick underpinned the whole MMUGW movement.

I like to think I am a supporter of true environmental issues that need our support, for instance the home forest of the Orangutan that are being burnt down to plant oil palm tress.
This to provide Europe with supposedly ECO Friendly fuel??

I see that as the EU committing a crime against Nature, but perhaps that is the political CO2 agenda after all. Diversion away from the real issue?

[Pesty]

turbobloke said:

.

you are fking stting me. missed that one. i'm still wound up about the wwf doing the same thing a few years ago.

can you imagine the fking outrage if it was the other way around? anyway i guess this is old news.

tts all of them

[Globs]

Devil2575 said:

Globs said:

Devil2575 said:

I am a chemical engineer working for a Petrochemical business based in the UK. I have a degree in Chemistry and a degree in Chemical engineering. I have no political connections.

You should be annoyed at being conned about the role CO2 then surely?

This is an interesting point.

The answer is simple. How do I know i've been conned?

I don't. Unless I get up to speed on the science behind the issues being discussed and then review all the data, the raw data that is, then how can I possibly come to any meaningful conclusion?

A specific area of science isn't something that even someone with a scientific background like myself can dip into and quickly come up with meaningful views, unless you happen to have expertise in that specific area already.

I'm sorry but there simply isn't any science, so it doesn't take much understanding.

There is a set of 'raw' data, some of which is doctored more than others.
Then there is The Weather. That stuff outside, you know, you can feel that yourself, first hand. A brief step outside on any given day is exactly the same as any brief step outside a decade or two ago.
Then there are computer models. Computer models are not science, they are simulations. Simulators need to balance to work in a mathematical sense, but none of the climate models balance at all. Most are 10% out IIRC.
Then there is 'The Weather' from the Met office, whose error on the current temperature in Cambridge is wrong on a daily basis us to about 6C. This is the office that assures me we'll see a 2C rise over 100 years, and yet they are 3x that out on current temperatures. That means that far from there being a 2C rise in 100 years, they are in fact full of ste.
Of course there are the Vostok ice cores - that was science. But that shows CO2 lagging temperature changes by several hundred years, and shows a clear causality that temperature influences CO2 concentrations. In the process it debunks the entire AGW theory in one stroke.

TB is just another contributor as far as I am concerned, there are many far more detailed climate sites around.
I can also see the politics, Henrick Svenson has a far better theory of how the climate works, backed up by actual scientific research, but he is treated like a leper by the moneyed AGW crowd because he dares question the orthodoxy.

And orthodoxy it is - you don't need a science degree to spot a false religion.

Devil2575 said:

The notion that anyone on here can come up with the answers after reading a dozen or so links is misguided, especially as many of those links are from political bloggers (Who talk ste for 99% of the time, Monbiot and Delingpole alike) or from a single source, Turbobloke.

Which gets back to why I want to know who he is. You should too. This man is feeding you information, would you not want to know who he is?

This man is feeding me information I can check for myself thanks. You confuse the messenger with the data, you should be looking at the data, not the messenger.

You are (incidentally) starting to sound a bit like a Lib.Dem. TBH. The last Lib Dem I spoke to wanted to eliminate all CO2 from the planet to avoid this catastrophic warming we will soon experience (This was in 2005, no warming occurred since). He failed of course to realise - not unsurprisingly given how much bad press it gets - that without CO2 we'd all be dead, and if it was reduced significantly large numbers of us would starve to death.

Lets face facts, China continues to spew out more and more CO2, and the planet isn't warming up at all. And you want to know who TB is? You need to find out who the people telling you that you'll never see snow again went this winter.

[The Excession]

Guam said:

Let me stop this RIGHT HERE

Indeed, and I'm sure many of the regulars on these threads will concur. (Sorry I can't help any more.)

Devil2575 said:

This is an interesting point.

The answer is simple. How do I know i've been conned?

I don't. Unless I get up to speed on the science behind the issues being discussed and then review all the data, the raw data that is, then how can I possibly come to any meaningful conclusion?

Looks like you do need to get up to speed on the science behind the issues being discussed and then review (not necessarily the data at first) but certainly go back and read the volumes of debate that have been posted here over the years, and it is years and years of developments, discussion and investigation.

Might I suggest that you start with this

and then perhaps move on to this.

Please do come back when you've done a bit of reading.

(fking 'ell it's bad enough getting attrition loops from the regulars let a lone the newbies).

[Pesty]

channel 4 news now. warmer sea temperature killing dolphins

now whales behaviour way out of the ordinary this year. they shouldn't be where they are.

the cause? a dramatic rise in surface temperature.

2c rise in 25 years,.

Edited by Pesty on Tuesday 6th March 19:51

[turbobloke]

Curious. You have to wonder what temperature change dolphins et al experience for other reasons apart from the cars that belong to PHers.

It's data but responding to politics in the politics thread so OK hopefully.



As nothing has changed for 10 years why did this not happen ten years ago?

Or it it a local phenomenon or from a cause not eliminated by the lightweight thought that usually goes into this kind of reporting?

[nelly1]

Pesty said:

channel 4 news now. warmer sea temperature killing dolphins

now whales behaviour way out of the ordinary this year. they shouldn't be where they are.

the cause? a dramatic rise in surface temperature.

2c rise in 25 years,.

Article here...

Article said:

We speed away... closer to more placid animals who appear perfectly content with having measurements taken of their food source, namely plankton, and environmental temperatures - temperatures that have been rapidly increasing in the last few months according to Stormy: "We measure surface temperatures and we are about two degrees celsius warmer compared to the average over the last 30 years, the other thing we've noticed is their food source, namely plankton is richer and stronger than before.

"The whole basic biology of the area has changed in almost a season."

I ask him what/who is to blame: "I know what you're hinting at, truth is I don't know if humans are to blame but it feels to me like it's only us who can sort it out and the rest of the world is waiting"

So the SST has increased in the last few months? Winter-->Spring?

An areas biology can change in a season? Who knew?

The Plankton is 'richer and stronger than before'.

Who / what is to blame?

"Truth is I don't know..."

Another piece of emotive drivel then.

[turbobloke]

Glad I missed the report, there are objects near the TV at the mo belonging to Mrs TB and I'd be in big trouble throwing one at the screen.

Nothing salacious

[The Excession]

Pesty said:

now whales behaviour way out of the ordinary this year. they shouldn't be where they are.

You mean like with a friend I saw today who I've not seen for a long time. Asked him for the 'news', he told me he's off to Spain for a fortnight in June, can't face another wet Irish summer, and wants to know where the fk all this global warming is.... screw that he said I'm off to Barrcelona to soak up some sun.

Bit like that really?

[turbobloke]

nelly1 said:

So the SST has increased in the last few months? Winter-->Spring?

An areas biology can change in a season? Who knew?

The Plankton is 'richer and stronger than before'.

Who / what is to blame?

"Truth is I don't know..."

Another piece of emotive drivel then.

Careful. You are displaying accurate analysis based on informed independent thought.

Quite. Unbelievable drivel yet we know to expect it on a regular basis.

[nelly1]

SST near Cape Cod:



Slight localised warming, but hardly 'Global' is it?

[turbobloke]

Update. There has been an uptick, a microtrend and people are getting overheated. Just look at the shocking situation here.

[nelly1]

Plus - how on earth have dolphins survived for 50 million years in much warmer seas than now unless there's another more logical explanation than doesn't involve the self-flagellation of us nasty humans?

[turbobloke]

nelly1 said:

SST near Cape Cod:

Slight localised warming, but hardly 'Global' is it?

I'm off to sign up with Greenpeas and Fiends of the Earth now.

That may not be totally accurate.

[nelly1]

turbobloke said:

I'm off to sign up with Greenpeas and Fiends of the Earth now.

That may not be totally accurate.

I'm off for a tuna sandwich...