Climate Change

[Cape Blue]

Incidentally Cape Blue I notice your postings seem to be very on message for the not so 'New Labour' policy package. Not just for this thread but others. I have nothing against New labour as such, apart from the illegal war and a feeling of massive disappointment at the dithering and wasted opportunities, but is there something you should be telling us? An interest you ought to declare perhaps?

Grouser, I think much of what Labour has done has been pretty good - the Iraq war was pure idiocy (and this was clear before not just in hindsight) and I also think the charging by universities for tuition fees is also a retrograde step for a party that is meant to help those from non-advantaged backgrounds. These were both dire mistakes.

Otherwise I think they have done pretty well - continued economic expansion in the face of difficult globalisation choices, interest rate stability, a positive approach to Europe, investment in NHS staffing, gay marriage, etc.

I'd like to see free education, the UK leading the way in renewable energy and improving our transport infrastructure to permit better, joined-up mass transit for commuting.

I'm not sure that I am "on-message" for new labour, but I do think that each government has a sell-by date for the proles whereby they they get bored and need a change, regardless of what the government has done - this is often driven by the popular press who enjoy creating a few good stories about paedo immigrant criminals or any other tag that lends itself to the low level bigotry of the lower orders, or the taxing of "hard earned" income going to the feckless, for the middle classes to gripe about.

I also think that the Brits have a natural tendency to be glass half empty and to focus on the bad whilst discounting the good, which also limits the lifespan of any government, regardless of colour.

Who are you "on message" for and what are the ditherings and wasted opportunities that you are disappointed about?

[yomper]

I note with interest that once again Cape Blue finds it easier to attack the individual than to refute the issues raised.

Yomper, I'm not sure that I am attacking an individual - more pointing out that the TV program you all want to jump onto as the absolute truth to back up "gut feelings", in the face of the vast majority of scientists to the contrary, was in fact produced by a guy whose career is producing contrarian reports based on dubious data manipulation to get ratings.

Could you be cajoled into actually watching the program? Serious question.

"The vast majority of scientists" - Err well actually as several scientists who resigned in disgust from the IPCC attest on the program, there is no big 'consensus' of agreement among the scientists who contributed to the IPCC report on anthropogenic global warming. It's an illusion partly created by the editors of the report continuing to include the names of dissenters in their list of contributors. One eminent scientist on the program relates how he had to threaten the IPCC with legal action to get his name removed! The program also shows how the comments of scientists included in the list of 2500 (the majority of whom aren't scientists at all) were simply deleted from the final edited report if they cast doubt on anthropogenic forced climate change. This final editing was not done by scientists at all, but by government representatives and various climate change industry benefactees.

"Dubious data manipulation" - you haven't watched the program! How are you able to comment? The data presented on the program is actually better and more rigorously attributed than the 'facts' presented by the IPCC. A recent attempt to force an eminent man made global warming proponent to publish his data under the freedom of information act has been met with a refusal on the grounds that it falls under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004, and disclosure is refused! Scientific rigour and repeatability? I think not. In a previous successfull forcing into the open of the parameters used in a computer model predicting large temperature increases, it was found that the rate of increase of CO2 emissions from man made sources was simply doubled to achieve the desired result! SHAMELESS! Animals, rotting leaves, and the oceans all emit massively more CO2 into the atmosphere than mankind does. What caused the 300 year mediaeval warm period? What caused the 3000 year Holocene climate optimum in the bronze age? Woodsmoke?
Both these time periods saw higher temperatures than we have today.

"the TV program you all want to jump onto as the absolute truth" - Hang on a minute, who said that? You are setting up a straw man to watch him burn. Grouser said the program was interesting, and so it is, as a counterpoint to fantasy such as 'An Inconvenient Truth'. No-one here is foolish enough to believe TV presentations as absolute truth, though the fact that one half of the story is being force fed to schoolchildren and workers in their offices while the heretical counterview is rubbished with the lofty sneers of true believers is deeply worrying to anyone with half a brain. What happened to balanced education and critical appraisal?

Please actually watch the program before making further comment.

[BENIDORM]

BYE HECK

And I thought my oxo cube subject was heavy.....don't know what to

think anymore!

[yomper]

I see the association of British Drivers are getting stuck into this one too.

The second screening of Wag TV's revelatory and revolutionary documentary "The Great Global Warming Swindle" takes place on Monday the 12th of March at 10pm on More 4. This is essential viewing and will allow its audience to discover that, in spite of shrill hyperbole from environmentalists, lifestyle fascists, and politicians in thrall at the amount of social engineering and tax revenue available from this quackery, mankind is not destroying the planet after all, as current climate change is modest and natural.

Consequently we can sleep easy in our thermally insulated centrally heated homes, and drive guilt-free in our highly taxed cars, while the third world can and should develop and not be held in medieval lifestyles through fears engineered by the irrational demonisation of plant food gas, carbon dioxide.

This compelling account of the biggest con-trick ever perpetrated on humanity in the name of junk science - the con-trick otherwise known as man-made global warming theory - features a series of eminent international award winning scientists from the fields of climatology, oceanography, geology, biogeography, astrophysics and polar research, as well as the former leader of Greenpeace Dr Patrick Moore who describes the global warming industry as 'anti-human'.

The myth that there is an overwhelming scientific consensus on this issue, and that anyone daring to hold an opposite viewpoint must be a fringe eccentric in the pay of Big-Oil, is also blown apart as the array of scientists, including IPCC contributors, point out the scientific fallacies and political collusion involved in this shameful duplicity.

As the programme indicates: "it's not true...it's not science...it's propaganda...we're just being told lies".

Given that the scientific content also destroys any reputation that remained surrounding Al Gore's quackumentary 'An inconvenient Truth', it is only right and in the interest of balance that all companies and schools currently intending to show the Gore movie to their employees or pupils, must then show The Great Global Warming Swindle to prevent any chance of misrepresentation or bias.

ABD Chairman Brian Gregory comments:
"Given the calibre of the scientists speaking in this documentary and the demonstrable validity of their conclusions, we can expect the global warming industry and its supporters to resort to the only tactic left to them - ad hominem attacks involving attempts to smear those involved in making the programme. This is to be expected but will be recognised for what it is - an admission that the real argument has been lost. The contents and contributors remain as the calm voice of reason in a world where this topic is now 'beyond reason'."

The documentary "The Great Global Warming Swindle" can be obtained on DVD from Wag TV

www.wagtv.com/acatalog/store.asp

More4 is available on:
Freeview - Channel 13
NTL - Channel 166
Telewest - Channel 142
Sky - Channel 142 (as part of a basic package)

Repeat of the program is on Monday the 12th of March at 10pm

Also avaialable on the google video service at:
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?doc ... 2811497638&

and as a bittorrent download at:
www.mininova.org/tor/612593

[nevada smith]

it would seem that neither yompers nor johnp
are able to answer questions about their own statements
so, i'll move on...

[JohnP]

it would seem that neither yompers nor johnp
are able to answer questions about their own statements
so, i'll move on...

Debate is Soooooooo frustrating in writing I thought I had answered as I am sure yompers has, NS doesn't think we have.
Life is indeed too short to continue this on here.
Have a nice day all

[RichardCoeurdeLion]

Johnp

Noticed your based Dolores. Fella that cuts my hair (what little there is)has a place there. What do you think of the area.

Terrific day today. I think spring is on the way. Off to great canalside pub, near Bromsgrove, for carvery then back for the Rugby.

Rick

[yomper]

it would seem that neither yompers nor johnp
are able to answer questions about their own statements
so, i'll move on...

Do you want to debate the causes global warming or just snipe at the protagonists? Haven't seen much in the way of facts concerning a causal link between CO2 and temperature increase from you so far. Any links to some solid properly referenced info which doesn't invoke a whacky computer model whose parameters we're not allowed to see?

[Grouser]

Cape Blue not on message for anyone. Not until politicians realise that their role is to make the need for their existence obsolete. I was briefly suffused with hope when Blair got in but...
What do I mean by dithering?
For a start the constant fiddling and tweaking of things, especially in education and health. Nobody gets a chance for a system to bed in and prove its worth, or lack of it before it's tweaked again. A good example of this is the NHSU project, an initiative of Alan Milburn's. As the NHS is the largest employer in Britain with a staff that requires plenty of training and development, the idea of an in house university is a good one. It was set up countrywide at a cost of millions. Two years down the line, just as it was starting to deliver results there was a spending review and it was axed. Anyone with any sense at all can see that a project of that size and complexity requires more than two years to bed in and be properly effective, yet it was cut with the consequent huge waste of investment, together with redundancy and infrastructure costs.
Given this kind of ineptitude it seems of great concern to me that this debate about carbon dioxide is being hijacked and presented as a foregone conclusion, when it would seem to be nothing of the sort. Yet it is being trotted out once again as a justification for a reactivation of a nuclear power policy on the grounds that this is carbon neutral energy.
It bears a frightening resemblance to all that incontrovertible evidence of Saddam's WMD's.

[nevada smith]

my position is stated quite clearly
at the bottom of page 2 of this thread...

[nevada smith]

grouser,
(if your tongue was in your cheek ignore this...)
i had a great deal of respect for colin powell
considered him a viable candidate for president
(prior to his switch to the republican party)
even considered his work as secretary of state commendable, but
as i watched him address the united nations
not for one second
did i believe there was incontrovertable evidence for wmd...

[Retro P]

Do you mean incontravertable evidence FOR wmd or OF wmd??

[nevada smith]

one of those quirks of 'american' english -
my humblest apologies...

[JohnP]

Johnp

Noticed your based Dolores. Fella that cuts my hair (what little there is)has a place there. What do you think of the area.

Rick

RG sounds like a lovely way to spend the day - enjoy I live just outside Dolores (the one near Elche - there are a few) Its still got a little town feel to it even though it is expanding (hopefully legally!)
My good lady stays there while I supply the beer tokens commuting to a North Sea oil rig,
I will watch the rugby with my Jock chums. All of which will have un-earthed a French relative!!

[Grouser]

Nevada, what I meant was it was incontrovertible in the same way as carbon dioxide as the cause of global warming is now being presented as fact. Tony Blair made it clear to parliament that Saddam was a clear and present danger. If there was any doubt he had weapons of mass destruction, he was within spitting distance of getting them. If I recall correctly the time of 45 minutes was mentioned as the amount of notice we would have had for an attack from him. This, despite all the evidence to the contrary coming from Hans Blix, was the justification for our involvement, alongside the US, in the war. Only after the event when no WMD's were found did the goalposts begin to move.

[RichardCoeurdeLion]

I will watch the rugby with my Jock chums. All of which will have un-earthed a French relative!!

Barber's Dolores is near Torrevieja. Is that the same one?

Were you on the rig for the rugby or shore based. The rigs are dry aren't they? We got back for the second half. What a good game.

rick

[Valencia_Paul]

I see David Cameron is talking about taxes for frequent flyers and generally trying to put tax on aviation fuel. That will go down like a lead balloon.

[JohnP]

Barber's Dolores is near Torrevieja. Is that the same one?

Were you on the rig for the rugby or shore based. The rigs are dry aren't they?

It probably is the same one, about 20 minutes away?

I was (still am) out here and Yes it is dry - 2 whole weeks although better than the 4 weeks I have done on other platforms

[Retro P]

one of those quirks of 'american' english -
my humblest apologies...

No problem Nevada!

[yomper]

to get back to grouser's theme...

with millions of google graphs, charts & scribblings concerning
'climate change' and 'global warming'
'spending' our time arguing about whether 'it is' or 'it isn't' is nonproductive
by the time we have an answer to these 'possibilities', the realities of
'breathable air, potable water and habitable land' will be a thing of the past

the following 12 problems are 'known', not 'speculative'

01. destruction of natural habitats - plants & animals, land & sea
02. wild foods - especially fish
03. loss of wild species - plants (eg trees) & animals
04. soils of farmlands
05. major (natural) energy sources - fossil fuels, gas, coal
06. fresh-water rivers & lakes - use & diversion
07. sunlight - photosynthetic capacity
08. industrial release - into air, soil, oceans, rivers & lakes
09. alien species - plants & animals moved from natural to foreign habitat
10. human waste - we're sending garbage to china... ?
11. world population
12. that population's impact on the environment

most or all of these problems are destined to become acute
within the lifetime of today's young adults -
even the world's present population is living at a non-sustainable level...

Seems to me that all these issues are important and worthy of debate. BUT..... none of them have much to do with whether such warming as there is of the worlds climate (mostly in the northern hemisphere -Antarctica has been getting colder for a while now), is down to mankinds activity.

I do agree that spending 4 billion dollars a year trying to prove climate change is man made is crazy when it could be spent working on the problems you enumerate though.