Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. (Vol 5)
Discussion
Diderot said:
LongQ said:
wc98 said:
as a kid i used to idolise him. watched and read everything he did. these days not so much. i think the kindest applicable term i can think of is "gone emeritus" .
It seems his 'role' at COP24 is to present some sort of emotional, tugging at the heart strings, presentation of the 'fears' of the masses. The masses are being asked to provide a supply of fear statements that he can present. Presumably now that head of the UN Environment organisation has resigned over excessive CO2 liberation through the medium of travel their PR operation needs a figurehead of some sort to give them a form of credibility.Probably a good role for him. Emotion rather than understanding. That said it might be easier for him if the comments were to be provided by animals other than humans.
Maybe he will have an opportunity to push his population reduction message once again.
On the positive side, at least it is all clearly politics rather than science.
Diderot said:
Beyond the hypocrisy which is of course entirely aligned with the UNIPCC's grand narrative, have you actually bothered to read the Climategate emails? If you haven't yet done so, then please do as I feel confident that given your background as a pilot you would be more than a little alarmed at the appalling lack of integrity demonstrated by the soi-disant scientists involved. In particular I think you would find the comments by one of the poor PhD lackeys crunching numbers most enlightening if not very very frightening. Mama mia et hoc genus omne.
And yet not one investigation into the emails on either side of the Atlantic has found anything to be concerned about. And there have been many, see here:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_...
Each email has been explained.
But of course we all know that ‘context’ doesn’t loom large in the deniers handbook.
gadgetmac said:
Diderot said:
Beyond the hypocrisy which is of course entirely aligned with the UNIPCC's grand narrative, have you actually bothered to read the Climategate emails? If you haven't yet done so, then please do as I feel confident that given your background as a pilot you would be more than a little alarmed at the appalling lack of integrity demonstrated by the soi-disant scientists involved. In particular I think you would find the comments by one of the poor PhD lackeys crunching numbers most enlightening if not very very frightening. Mama mia et hoc genus omne.
And yet not one investigation into the emails on either side of the Atlantic has found anything to be concerned about. And there have been many, see here:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_...
Each email has been explained.
But of course we all know that ‘context’ doesn’t loom large in the deniers handbook.
Genuinely satisfied? No concerns? No Questions?
No concern about the way the 'Investigations' were set up and completed? Or about the technical competence of the assessors? Or conflict of interests that were apparent?
Is there anything you would question?
Blair's Iraq dossier?
Global famine by 1980?
The existence of multiple Gods when billions of people explicitly believe in them?
Why did Dr. David Kelly die?
How did Al Gore make his money?
Is RIchard Branson really an environmentalist?
Is James Dyson really a patriot?
Margaret Thatcher's sanity?
Whether, on health grounds alone, the bar at the Houses of Parliament should be allowed to sell at subsidised prices?
What would concern you?
LongQ said:
And you are totally satisfied by that?
Genuinely satisfied? No concerns? No Questions?
No concern about the way the 'Investigations' were set up and completed? Or about the technical competence of the assessors? Or conflict of interests that were apparent?
The investigations were many and from varied sources in more than one nation. You have to believe there’s a global conspiracy at play if you think they were all set-up and completed in a dubious fashion or with conflicts of interest at play.Genuinely satisfied? No concerns? No Questions?
No concern about the way the 'Investigations' were set up and completed? Or about the technical competence of the assessors? Or conflict of interests that were apparent?
Do you believe that?
Or do you have any kind of serious enquiry that found differently?
gadgetmac said:
And yet not one investigation into the emails on either side of the Atlantic has found anything to be concerned about. And there have been many, see here:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_...
Each email has been explained.
But of course we all know that ‘context’ doesn’t loom large in the deniers handbook.
"The committee was careful to point out that its report had been written after a single day of oral testimony and would not be as in-depth as other inquiries.[89]" thorough investigations ? aye right, iv'e a bridge i can sell you as well. just to lighten the mood it would appear magic tax gas has taken yet another holiday, this time from new york. i don't blame it though, it's 27 c below the average november temp at the moment . don't take my word for it, i am sure it will headline news on the bbc any moment now, or maybe not, after all it is only weather, would only count as anthropogenic global warming/climate change if it had been 27 c above the average temp for the month.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_...
Each email has been explained.
But of course we all know that ‘context’ doesn’t loom large in the deniers handbook.
gadgetmac said:
Diderot said:
Beyond the hypocrisy which is of course entirely aligned with the UNIPCC's grand narrative, have you actually bothered to read the Climategate emails? If you haven't yet done so, then please do as I feel confident that given your background as a pilot you would be more than a little alarmed at the appalling lack of integrity demonstrated by the soi-disant scientists involved. In particular I think you would find the comments by one of the poor PhD lackeys crunching numbers most enlightening if not very very frightening. Mama mia et hoc genus omne.
And yet not one investigation into the emails on either side of the Atlantic has found anything to be concerned about. And there have been many, see here:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_...
Each email has been explained.
But of course we all know that ‘context’ doesn’t loom large in the deniers handbook.
wc98 said:
gadgetmac said:
And yet not one investigation into the emails on either side of the Atlantic has found anything to be concerned about. And there have been many, see here:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_...
Each email has been explained.
But of course we all know that ‘context’ doesn’t loom large in the deniers handbook.
"The committee was careful to point out that its report had been written after a single day of oral testimony and would not be as in-depth as other inquiries.[89]" thorough investigations ? aye right, iv'e a bridge i can sell you as well. just to lighten the mood it would appear magic tax gas has taken yet another holiday, this time from new york. i don't blame it though, it's 27 c below the average november temp at the moment . don't take my word for it, i am sure it will headline news on the bbc any moment now, or maybe not, after all it is only weather, would only count as anthropogenic global warming/climate change if it had been 27 c above the average temp for the month.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_...
Each email has been explained.
But of course we all know that ‘context’ doesn’t loom large in the deniers handbook.
gadgetmac said:
Diderot said:
Beyond the hypocrisy which is of course entirely aligned with the UNIPCC's grand narrative, have you actually bothered to read the Climategate emails? If you haven't yet done so, then please do as I feel confident that given your background as a pilot you would be more than a little alarmed at the appalling lack of integrity demonstrated by the soi-disant scientists involved. In particular I think you would find the comments by one of the poor PhD lackeys crunching numbers most enlightening if not very very frightening. Mama mia et hoc genus omne.
And yet not one investigation into the emails on either side of the Atlantic has found anything to be concerned about. And there have been many, see here:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_...
Each email has been explained.
But of course we all know that ‘context’ doesn’t loom large in the deniers handbook.
kypedia article that anyone can contribute to. Harry even asked you to read it. But did you read it? China-backed coal projects prompt climate change fears
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-463...
As levels of greenhouse gases reach a new record, concerns are growing about the role of China in global warming.
For years, the increase in the number of Chinese coal-fired power stations has been criticised.
Now environmental groups say China is also backing dozens of coal projects far beyond its borders.
Coal is the most damaging of the fossil fuels because of the quantity of carbon dioxide it releases when it's burned.....continues
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-463...
As levels of greenhouse gases reach a new record, concerns are growing about the role of China in global warming.
For years, the increase in the number of Chinese coal-fired power stations has been criticised.
Now environmental groups say China is also backing dozens of coal projects far beyond its borders.
Coal is the most damaging of the fossil fuels because of the quantity of carbon dioxide it releases when it's burned.....continues
dickymint said:
gadgetmac said:
Diderot said:
Beyond the hypocrisy which is of course entirely aligned with the UNIPCC's grand narrative, have you actually bothered to read the Climategate emails? If you haven't yet done so, then please do as I feel confident that given your background as a pilot you would be more than a little alarmed at the appalling lack of integrity demonstrated by the soi-disant scientists involved. In particular I think you would find the comments by one of the poor PhD lackeys crunching numbers most enlightening if not very very frightening. Mama mia et hoc genus omne.
And yet not one investigation into the emails on either side of the Atlantic has found anything to be concerned about. And there have been many, see here:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_...
Each email has been explained.
But of course we all know that ‘context’ doesn’t loom large in the deniers handbook.
Have you? All of them?
gadgetmac said:
dickymint said:
gadgetmac said:
Diderot said:
Beyond the hypocrisy which is of course entirely aligned with the UNIPCC's grand narrative, have you actually bothered to read the Climategate emails? If you haven't yet done so, then please do as I feel confident that given your background as a pilot you would be more than a little alarmed at the appalling lack of integrity demonstrated by the soi-disant scientists involved. In particular I think you would find the comments by one of the poor PhD lackeys crunching numbers most enlightening if not very very frightening. Mama mia et hoc genus omne.
And yet not one investigation into the emails on either side of the Atlantic has found anything to be concerned about. And there have been many, see here:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_...
Each email has been explained.
But of course we all know that ‘context’ doesn’t loom large in the deniers handbook.
Have you? All of them?
robinessex said:
gadgetmac said:
Robinessex: As a passenger would you prefer that the trained and qualified professional pilot with years of experience be in charge or would you rather the opinions of the flight attendants and other passengers be given priority on matters arising during the flight?
About the most perverse reply I've ever seen here. You've totally missed the point I'm trying to make, which requires plane jockey El Stovey to reply first. You’ve shot yourself in the foot though by trying to be too clever though.
TX.
Terminator X said:
robinessex said:
gadgetmac said:
Robinessex: As a passenger would you prefer that the trained and qualified professional pilot with years of experience be in charge or would you rather the opinions of the flight attendants and other passengers be given priority on matters arising during the flight?
About the most perverse reply I've ever seen here. You've totally missed the point I'm trying to make, which requires plane jockey El Stovey to reply first. You’ve shot yourself in the foot though by trying to be too clever though.TX.
gadgetmac said:
dickymint said:
gadgetmac said:
Terminator X said:
RJG46 said:
If you genuinely care about the environment just don't have children.
What a ridiculously sensible post ... 7.7bn and counting!TX.
GM
As per usual.
Nothing false or misleading there then. You swerved.
Climate change: Report warns of growing impact on US life
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-4632516...
Unchecked climate change will cost the US hundreds of billions of dollars and damage human health and quality of life, a US government report warns.
"Future risks from climate change depend... on decisions made today," the 4th National Climate Assessment says.
The report says climate change is "presenting growing challenges to human health and safety, quality of life, and the rate of economic growth".
The warning is at odds with the Trump administration's fossil fuels agenda.....continues
No proof, just a doom laden crystal ball. Even the Beebs video shows perfectly natural events. Absolutely no proof of all the scenarios they predict. Ah, nearly forgot COP24 is happening between Dec 2nd to 14th, so the Beebs got to saturate the news with AGW & CC propaganda.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-4632516...
Unchecked climate change will cost the US hundreds of billions of dollars and damage human health and quality of life, a US government report warns.
"Future risks from climate change depend... on decisions made today," the 4th National Climate Assessment says.
The report says climate change is "presenting growing challenges to human health and safety, quality of life, and the rate of economic growth".
The warning is at odds with the Trump administration's fossil fuels agenda.....continues
No proof, just a doom laden crystal ball. Even the Beebs video shows perfectly natural events. Absolutely no proof of all the scenarios they predict. Ah, nearly forgot COP24 is happening between Dec 2nd to 14th, so the Beebs got to saturate the news with AGW & CC propaganda.
robinessex said:
Climate change: Report warns of growing impact on US life
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-4632516...
Unchecked climate change will cost the US hundreds of billions of dollars and damage human health and quality of life, a US government report warns.
"Future risks from climate change depend... on decisions made today," the 4th National Climate Assessment says.
The report says climate change is "presenting growing challenges to human health and safety, quality of life, and the rate of economic growth".
The warning is at odds with the Trump administration's fossil fuels agenda.....continues
No proof, just a doom laden crystal ball. Even the Beebs video shows perfectly natural events. Absolutely no proof of all the scenarios they predict. Ah, nearly forgot COP24 is happening between Dec 2nd to 14th, so the Beebs got to saturate the news with AGW & CC propaganda.
the people that wrote that report should be jailed imo. it is sheer propaganda and nothing more. the claims regarding forest fires and hurricanes are nonsense.the reduction in co2 output they are asking for would create an order of magnitude more degradation in quality of life within peoples lifetimes than their current guesswork would 100 years from now. that a publicly funded uk broadcaster is continually pushing this crap unchallenged is an utter disgrace.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-4632516...
Unchecked climate change will cost the US hundreds of billions of dollars and damage human health and quality of life, a US government report warns.
"Future risks from climate change depend... on decisions made today," the 4th National Climate Assessment says.
The report says climate change is "presenting growing challenges to human health and safety, quality of life, and the rate of economic growth".
The warning is at odds with the Trump administration's fossil fuels agenda.....continues
No proof, just a doom laden crystal ball. Even the Beebs video shows perfectly natural events. Absolutely no proof of all the scenarios they predict. Ah, nearly forgot COP24 is happening between Dec 2nd to 14th, so the Beebs got to saturate the news with AGW & CC propaganda.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff