Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. (Vol 5)
Discussion
gadgetmac said:
El stovey said:
dickymint said:
El stovey said:
wc98 said:
i just can't buy that we have depraved posters and mods conspiring to remove agw supporting posters from this thread. that would be a bit tin foil hat,conspiracy theorist style thinking. your not an anti vaccination moon landing hoax type are you 
No I don’t think that either. I do think it’s wrong that dickymint got banned and cried about it in feedback to get himself reinstated then went on a reporting campaign to try and get all of us banned.
I certainly think it’s morally wrong for dickymint to get someone banned from the thread and then PistonHeads completely, based on a comments made not to him but to turbobloke though.
He’s got someone banned from the forum over comments that weren’t even made to him.
It is undoubtably a fact that you got someone banned from the thread and now from the forum over a comment made to turbobloke.
You’ve been trying to get a few of us banned for a while now and it’s transparent and pathetic.
Diderot said:
The ranters are the ecomentalists as usual, saying it doesn't go far enough. And it ain't legally binding anyway. Moreover, do you really believe that human beings can 'stop dangerous/catastrophic climate change'?
I always think of this when I hear the "We will stop Global Warming" types .... 
Jasandjules said:
I always think of this when I hear the "We will stop Global Warming" types ....
C n u t (no sniggering at the back!) the Great was demonstrating his inability to control nature.So it would seem to be a very apt image
depending on your views.(I will save the North Sea Empire references for the Brexit thread, but it's amazing to think that only 10 years before the Norman conquest, the UK, Norway and Denmark were unified under
. ...)Ps he obviously wasn't that great as the swear filters can't cope with him..
El stovey said:
dickymint said:
El stovey said:
wc98 said:
i just can't buy that we have depraved posters and mods conspiring to remove agw supporting posters from this thread. that would be a bit tin foil hat,conspiracy theorist style thinking. your not an anti vaccination moon landing hoax type are you
No I don’t think that either. I do think it’s wrong that dickymint got banned and cried about it in feedback to get himself reinstated then went on a reporting campaign to try and get all of us banned.
I certainly think it’s morally wrong for dickymint to get someone banned from the thread and then PistonHeads completely, based on a comments made not to him but to turbobloke though.
He’s got someone banned from the forum over comments that weren’t even made to him.
It is undoubtably a fact that you got someone banned from the thread and now from the forum over a comment made to turbobloke.
You’ve been trying to get a few of us banned for a while now and it’s transparent and pathetic.
Nice to see the abusive tones in here has mellowed down quite considerably since though.
Like i said try keeping it off here and start a new thread.
dickymint said:
Yes you answered wc98s question, you commented on me, so i have every right to reply to it! For the record I got nobody "banned" I reported foul abusive language and put my hands up to it (i didn't hide behind my keyboard). Was I the only one to report this? Was it just me that took offence? Mods took the same view? As far as Paddy getting banned from the whole forum it's hardly surprising when you read his posts about 'moderation' egged on by you and a few others you have only yourselves to blame.
Nice to see the abusive tones in here has mellowed down quite considerably since though.
Like i said try keeping it off here and start a new thread.
The thread has improved because you (presumably ashamed of your pathetic behaviour) have been on it less since you deliberately got paddy banned. Nice to see the abusive tones in here has mellowed down quite considerably since though.
Like i said try keeping it off here and start a new thread.
Most of the posters I argue with on here are honourable people that I disagree with but respect their opinions, you are however dishonest, evasive and vindictive and fawn after turbobloke like a little pet dog.
Your behaviour is motivated by revenge because you got banned for trolling. Pretending it is because you were “offended” by paddy’s “foul abusive language” is simply a lie.
Well done though, your echo chamber is more secure because you are getting those of us that disagree with you banned from the thread.
El stovey said:
dickymint said:
Yes you answered wc98s question, you commented on me, so i have every right to reply to it! For the record I got nobody "banned" I reported foul abusive language and put my hands up to it (i didn't hide behind my keyboard). Was I the only one to report this? Was it just me that took offence? Mods took the same view? As far as Paddy getting banned from the whole forum it's hardly surprising when you read his posts about 'moderation' egged on by you and a few others you have only yourselves to blame.
Nice to see the abusive tones in here has mellowed down quite considerably since though.
Like i said try keeping it off here and start a new thread.
The thread has improved because you (presumably ashamed of your pathetic behaviour) have been on it less since you deliberately got paddy banned. Nice to see the abusive tones in here has mellowed down quite considerably since though.
Like i said try keeping it off here and start a new thread.
Most of the posters I argue with on here are honourable people that I disagree with but respect their opinions, you are however dishonest, evasive and vindictive and fawn after turbobloke like a little pet dog.
Your behaviour is motivated by revenge because you got banned for trolling. Pretending it is because you were “offended” by paddy’s “foul abusive language” is simply a lie.
Well done though, your echo chamber is more secure because you are getting those of us that disagree with you banned from the thread.
El stovey said:
The thread has improved because you (presumably ashamed of your pathetic behaviour) have been on it less since you deliberately got paddy banned.
Most of the posters I argue with on here are honourable people that I disagree with but respect their opinions, you are however dishonest, evasive and vindictive and fawn after turbobloke like a little pet dog.
Your behaviour is motivated by revenge because you got banned for trolling. Pretending it is because you were “offended” by paddy’s “foul abusive language” is simply a lie.
Well done though, your echo chamber is more secure because you are getting those of us that disagree with you banned from the thread.
Is there a repetition buzzer that can be used in this game?Most of the posters I argue with on here are honourable people that I disagree with but respect their opinions, you are however dishonest, evasive and vindictive and fawn after turbobloke like a little pet dog.
Your behaviour is motivated by revenge because you got banned for trolling. Pretending it is because you were “offended” by paddy’s “foul abusive language” is simply a lie.
Well done though, your echo chamber is more secure because you are getting those of us that disagree with you banned from the thread.
LongQ said:
El stovey said:
The thread has improved because you (presumably ashamed of your pathetic behaviour) have been on it less since you deliberately got paddy banned.
Most of the posters I argue with on here are honourable people that I disagree with but respect their opinions, you are however dishonest, evasive and vindictive and fawn after turbobloke like a little pet dog.
Your behaviour is motivated by revenge because you got banned for trolling. Pretending it is because you were “offended” by paddy’s “foul abusive language” is simply a lie.
Well done though, your echo chamber is more secure because you are getting those of us that disagree with you banned from the thread.
Is there a repetition buzzer that can be used in this game?Most of the posters I argue with on here are honourable people that I disagree with but respect their opinions, you are however dishonest, evasive and vindictive and fawn after turbobloke like a little pet dog.
Your behaviour is motivated by revenge because you got banned for trolling. Pretending it is because you were “offended” by paddy’s “foul abusive language” is simply a lie.
Well done though, your echo chamber is more secure because you are getting those of us that disagree with you banned from the thread.
Jonesy23 said:
As written by the European Investment Bank:
"To stop global warming the world needs to cough up the cash. A big part of the negotiations in Katowice revolve around climate finance - the transfer of money from rich countries to poor."
All about the money.
This concerns the commitment by developed countries to mobilise $100 billion per year in support of Climate Action (one of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals) in developing countries - that was on the back of the 2009 Copenhagen Accord. Banks talk money, climate finance gives them the language. "To stop global warming the world needs to cough up the cash. A big part of the negotiations in Katowice revolve around climate finance - the transfer of money from rich countries to poor."
All about the money.
'Climate finance' is simply finance used to support mitigation and/or adaptation actions. If you so wish, you can read the latest MDB climate finance report (here: https://www.ebrd.com/documents/comms-and-bis/clima... ). All Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) support international development and most, if not all, have specified climate finance targets (for both adaptation and mitigation) which helps them (and their donors) drive Climate Action.
In any case, there's a huge opportunity for developed and developing countries here, it's not simply one-sided and is mutually beneficial. Once a city-wide water treatment system has been designed, who do you think builds it? Maintains it? I can tell you that it's a mixture of both international and recipient country expertise.
Edited by LittleBigPlanet on Monday 17th December 08:12
People might be interested in this link, re altering data to produce rising temperatures
https://youtu.be/tlnwhcO5NC0
At about 24 minutes a report is shown that removed the (adjustments) and this shows no temperature rise.
Warning...... have not checked any contributers to see if they went to church or had any association with "big oil" or coal, they may or may not have used coal on their log burner.
https://youtu.be/tlnwhcO5NC0
At about 24 minutes a report is shown that removed the (adjustments) and this shows no temperature rise.
Warning...... have not checked any contributers to see if they went to church or had any association with "big oil" or coal, they may or may not have used coal on their log burner.
PRTVR said:
People might be interested in this link, re altering data to produce rising temperatures
https://youtu.be/tlnwhcO5NC0
At about 24 minutes a report is shown that removed the (adjustments) and this shows no temperature rise.
Warning...... have not checked any contributers to see if they went to church or had any association with "big oil" or coal, they may or may not have used coal on their log burner.
NOAA openly published adjustment information that shows 0.6 deg C of the vague and variable 0.6 to 0.8 deg C warming claimed for 1910-2000 is due to adjustments. The plot (below) shows adjustments not temperature, though the former accounts for most if not all of the latter in the time period above.https://youtu.be/tlnwhcO5NC0
At about 24 minutes a report is shown that removed the (adjustments) and this shows no temperature rise.
Warning...... have not checked any contributers to see if they went to church or had any association with "big oil" or coal, they may or may not have used coal on their log burner.
Meanwhile, back in the real world;
"Climate campaigners are calling on the BBC to declare a climate emergency and make the issue its top editorial priority."
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/dec/1...
They have a way with words -
"“We must collectively do whatever’s necessary non-violently, to persuade politicians and business leaders to relinquish their complacency and denial,” their open letter stated."
"Climate campaigners are calling on the BBC to declare a climate emergency and make the issue its top editorial priority."
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/dec/1...
They have a way with words -
"“We must collectively do whatever’s necessary non-violently, to persuade politicians and business leaders to relinquish their complacency and denial,” their open letter stated."
The Don of Croy said:
Meanwhile, back in the real world;
"Climate campaigners are calling on the BBC to declare a climate emergency and make the issue its top editorial priority."
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/dec/1...
They have a way with words -
"“We must collectively do whatever’s necessary non-violently, to persuade politicians and business leaders to relinquish their complacency and denial,” their open letter stated."
The Beeb should be independent, and publish NEWS, not PROPAGANDA"Climate campaigners are calling on the BBC to declare a climate emergency and make the issue its top editorial priority."
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/dec/1...
They have a way with words -
"“We must collectively do whatever’s necessary non-violently, to persuade politicians and business leaders to relinquish their complacency and denial,” their open letter stated."
The Don of Croy said:
Meanwhile, back in the real world;
"Climate campaigners are calling on the BBC to declare a climate emergency and make the issue its top editorial priority."
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/dec/1...
They have a way with words -
"“We must collectively do whatever’s necessary non-violently, to persuade politicians and business leaders to relinquish their complacency and denial,” their open letter stated."
UK politicians are complacent and in denial? When we're the only country (iirc) to put something so stupid and pointlessly costly on the statute books as the Climate Change Act?"Climate campaigners are calling on the BBC to declare a climate emergency and make the issue its top editorial priority."
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/dec/1...
They have a way with words -
"“We must collectively do whatever’s necessary non-violently, to persuade politicians and business leaders to relinquish their complacency and denial,” their open letter stated."
Does the BBC really need any more encouragement to be both focused and biased on this issue when it's already declared its total climate bias towards agw via official beeb policy - to the exclusion of data and objective evidence - while relentlessly churning out pro-agw propaganda?
UN desperation, Guardian desperation, activist desperation.
Paris was dead before Katowice. The aforementioned activists may get the media to respond. Politicians may emit more hot air. However the activists are merely heading further into irrelevance and accompanying them isn't compulsory.
Coercion won't work beyond a tolerance limit for a massive climate fairytales bill, a bill that individual taxpayers and businesses pay, and a limit which is either fast approaching or already met. Ask Macron.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff