Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. Vol 4
Discussion
gadgetmac said:
Diderot said:
‘Illusory perceptions, secret societies, scandals and conspiracy [...]?’ You’re beginning to sound like Durbster and his yawn-inducing memes. I was hoping for a vaguely enlightening disquisition on geo-politics and green tax policy but instead we have familiar diversionary tactics and a mediocre attempt at an ad hom. You still haven’t attempted to answer the question.
This from the person who used the term "dim witted"? No irony there at all. 
So the question is "How would the Govt plug the hole a reduction in environmental taxes would open"?
Why would they need to if they actually believe in what they are doing?
Here's Amber Rudd from your link: “We promised people clean, affordable and secure energy supplies and that’s what I’m going to deliver. We’ll focus support on renewables when they’re starting up - getting a good deal for billpayers is the top priority.”
Are you saying she doesn't actually believe in MMGW when she talks about clean energy and renewables but just goes along with it in order to keep the hole from opening?
gadgetmac said:
Diderot said:
‘Illusory perceptions, secret societies, scandals and conspiracy [...]?’ You’re beginning to sound like Durbster and his yawn-inducing memes. I was hoping for a vaguely enlightening disquisition on geo-politics and green tax policy but instead we have familiar diversionary tactics and a mediocre attempt at an ad hom. You still haven’t attempted to answer the question.
This from the person who used the term "dim witted"? No irony there at all. So the question is "How would the Govt plug the hole a reduction in environmental taxes would open"?
Why would they need to if they actually believe in what they are doing?
Here's Amber Rudd from your link: “We promised people clean, affordable and secure energy supplies and that’s what I’m going to deliver. We’ll focus support on renewables when they’re starting up - getting a good deal for billpayers is the top priority.”
Are you saying she doesn't actually believe in MMGW when she talks about clean energy and renewables but just goes along with it in order to keep the hole from opening?
So you still haven't answered the question yet.
turbobloke said:
gadgetmac said:
Diderot said:
‘Illusory perceptions, secret societies, scandals and conspiracy [...]?’ You’re beginning to sound like Durbster and his yawn-inducing memes. I was hoping for a vaguely enlightening disquisition on geo-politics and green tax policy but instead we have familiar diversionary tactics and a mediocre attempt at an ad hom. You still haven’t attempted to answer the question.
This from the person who used the term "dim witted"? No irony there at all. 
You moan about attrition loops then create one around the topic of irony yourself.
There have been several attempts to exploit the loss of life and suffering in India for political purposes in news coverage by portraying recent events as due to manmade global warming.
Apart from noting comments this is ‘the worst for 100 years’ meaning it was worse over 100 years ago when there was less carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, there’s more to this than msm outlets are currently mentioning. Taking monsoon rainfall data 1870-2017 and looking at ENSO (a natural phenomenon) the following pattern emerges.
Years when rainfall was 10% or more below the mean (‘drought’) for this interval associated with preceding El Nino conditions = 14
Years when rainfall was 10% or more below the mean (‘drought’) for this interval associated with preceding La Nina conditions = 0
Also
Years when rainfall was 10% or more above the mean (‘flood’) for this interval associated with preceding El Nino conditions = 0
Years when rainfall was 10% or more above the mean (‘flood’) for this interval associated with preceding La Nina conditions = 8
Through 2017 and into 2018, La Nina conditions are noted in ENSO advisories through to May, making the total 9 including this year if it continues. El Nino conditions haven't emerged (yet) in the current shift from La Nina to ENSO neutral.
There's been mention of ENSO=>monsoon weakening but not this year. One of the mechanisms reported involves perturbations to the Walker Circulation.
Apart from noting comments this is ‘the worst for 100 years’ meaning it was worse over 100 years ago when there was less carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, there’s more to this than msm outlets are currently mentioning. Taking monsoon rainfall data 1870-2017 and looking at ENSO (a natural phenomenon) the following pattern emerges.
Years when rainfall was 10% or more below the mean (‘drought’) for this interval associated with preceding El Nino conditions = 14
Years when rainfall was 10% or more below the mean (‘drought’) for this interval associated with preceding La Nina conditions = 0
Also
Years when rainfall was 10% or more above the mean (‘flood’) for this interval associated with preceding El Nino conditions = 0
Years when rainfall was 10% or more above the mean (‘flood’) for this interval associated with preceding La Nina conditions = 8
Through 2017 and into 2018, La Nina conditions are noted in ENSO advisories through to May, making the total 9 including this year if it continues. El Nino conditions haven't emerged (yet) in the current shift from La Nina to ENSO neutral.
There's been mention of ENSO=>monsoon weakening but not this year. One of the mechanisms reported involves perturbations to the Walker Circulation.
It looks as though Germany needs adding to the international ‘climate politics interest list’ (USA, Canada, Australia, Brazil).
http://www.climatechangenews.com/2018/08/14/german...
http://www.climatechangenews.com/2018/08/14/german...
Jazzy Jag said:
I think I'm beginning to understand this thread now.
If you don't like an article or someone posts something contrary to your point of view, you launch an ad hominem attack on Turbobloke.
I'm I getting this right?
Yeah...and it seems to work in reverse too. See Durbster, JJ etc for details.If you don't like an article or someone posts something contrary to your point of view, you launch an ad hominem attack on Turbobloke.
I'm I getting this right?
This climate politics may be of interest to some PHers following the thread so I'll throw it in.
No doubt the Guardian Economics Editor and Watts are both aware that what China is doing doesn't match what China is saying.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug...
There's a cracking quote from John Mitchell, Principal Research Fellow at UKMO. Previously we had Folland "The data don't matter. We're not basing our recommendations (to politicians) on the data, we're basing them on the climate models". I didn't personally hear it said or see it typed but now we have Mitchell “People underestimate the power of models. Observational evidence is not very useful.”
We've known for some time that the planet doesn't read IPCC reports, now we have confirmation
This is where climate has been for decades and still is - covered in politics.
No doubt the Guardian Economics Editor and Watts are both aware that what China is doing doesn't match what China is saying.
WUWT said:
The observation is that China has hideous pollution problems and rapidly growing CO2 emissions. But the political model greens cling to suggests that Chinese authoritarians could sweep these issues aside by decree – the objections of “climate appeasers” could be swept aside by naked force, the objections of “climate deniers” could be crushed by an authoritarian regime which does not tolerate dissent. One question – why hasn’t this already happened?
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/08/16/guardian-economics-editor-promotes-the-authoritarian-chinese-directed-capitalism-solution-to-climate-change/https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug...
There's a cracking quote from John Mitchell, Principal Research Fellow at UKMO. Previously we had Folland "The data don't matter. We're not basing our recommendations (to politicians) on the data, we're basing them on the climate models". I didn't personally hear it said or see it typed but now we have Mitchell “People underestimate the power of models. Observational evidence is not very useful.”
We've known for some time that the planet doesn't read IPCC reports, now we have confirmation
This is where climate has been for decades and still is - covered in politics.
In the US not every climate denier is from the alt-right but every alt-right member is a climate denier.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jul/0...
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jul/0...
gadgetmac said:
DocJock said:
Plenty of ad homs in both directions if you look back.
The thread is now less of a discussion and more monkeys throwing s
te at each other. with the occasional political point thrown in.
What happened to this post? Why did you withdraw it DJ?The thread is now less of a discussion and more monkeys throwing s
te at each other. with the occasional political point thrown in.yes i know, shouldn't feed them
dickymint said:
gadgetmac said:
DocJock said:
Plenty of ad homs in both directions if you look back.
The thread is now less of a discussion and more monkeys throwing ste at each other. with the occasional political point thrown in.
What happened to this post? Why did you withdraw it DJ?The thread is now less of a discussion and more monkeys throwing s
te at each other. with the occasional political point thrown in.te throwing monkeys gadgetmac said:
dickymint said:
gadgetmac said:
DocJock said:
Plenty of ad homs in both directions if you look back.
The thread is now less of a discussion and more monkeys throwing ste at each other. with the occasional political point thrown in.
What happened to this post? Why did you withdraw it DJ?The thread is now less of a discussion and more monkeys throwing s
te at each other. with the occasional political point thrown in.
dickymint said:
gadgetmac said:
dickymint said:
gadgetmac said:
DocJock said:
Plenty of ad homs in both directions if you look back.
The thread is now less of a discussion and more monkeys throwing ste at each other. with the occasional political point thrown in.
What happened to this post? Why did you withdraw it DJ?The thread is now less of a discussion and more monkeys throwing s
te at each other. with the occasional political point thrown in.gadgetmac said:
dickymint said:
gadgetmac said:
dickymint said:
gadgetmac said:
DocJock said:
Plenty of ad homs in both directions if you look back.
The thread is now less of a discussion and more monkeys throwing ste at each other. with the occasional political point thrown in.
What happened to this post? Why did you withdraw it DJ?The thread is now less of a discussion and more monkeys throwing s
te at each other. with the occasional political point thrown in.dickymint said:
I'll ask again then. Why do you want to know why a poster decides to delete his post? Why is it that important to you?
What’s it got to do with you why I asked???I did ask, he answered, end of.
Why do you want to continue this line? Trolling?
Why is it so important to you why I asked him?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff