Interesting News Snippets

Read the forum code of contact

Member for

12 years 9 months

Posts: 851

John, again you are (deliberately?) missing the point. The Wail has been hauled over the coals for misrepresenting the report and the authors conclusions to suit their agenda and providing a graphic that misrepresented the findings in an attmpt to justify it's own ( in my humble opinion and that of a large number of very clever people) incorrect agenda. Whether you agree or disagree with the data is immaterial, what I was pointing out is that the Cr@p reporting which is a characteristic of the Dacre rag.
Oh, and by the way, The only fraudulent data is that of the climate deniers. You clearly do genuinely believe in the tosh they peddle. Bless

Member for

6 years 9 months

Posts: 110

The debate about AGW - man-made global warming (now conveniently but meaninglessly renamed climate change) still hinges on the data, not any interpretation of the data.

Much of the "data" used as the basis for AGW computer modelling has long been found either fraudulent, inaccurate or both. There is so much doubt and contradiction about the whole AGW culture that no truly disinterested scientist could or should, unconditionally, accept the dogma.

Member for

13 years

Posts: 6,535

Trekkie,

See 1303. That just about sums up this whole fraudulent dogs breakfast. When notoriously, the IPCC coupled with the so-called University of East Anglia cooked the books, it was pretty obvious that, from that point 'they' could not sustain any credibility.

Anyone who still believes that man made climate change is anything other than completely natural phenomena is one ring short of a tree. Anyone who believes that climate change can be measured to thus provide a conclusive answer in anything less than several millennia is one cube short of an iceberg.

It might be that anyone ten thousand years from now standing on top of an ice sheet 100 feet thick and covering Hyde Park as well as the rest of Northern Europe might be tempted to say: "Do you know the climate change activists were right all the time". Despite all that the developed nations stupidly did by taxing industry, stifling industrial output, restricting development and making the quality of life on Earth generally quite unacceptable, we still found ourselves deep in dudoo. None of the measures adopted by well and not so well meaning idiots made the slightest difference except by introducing a very painful quality of restricted existence to life as it was.

Wakeup, you're being conned !

Member for

12 years 9 months

Posts: 851

No, it is only poor scientists that are willing to misinterpret the data to form any other conclusion than there is man-made climate change. It is you who are being duped I am afraid.

We will not agree on this. You have been told by those who have an agenda that they have "proved" the data to be false. Unfortunately, innacurate reporting on the leaked emails report you mentioned has generated it's own self validation amongst climate change deniers. Tell a lie often enough..... There were a number of enquiries into the case at the time and whilst the UEA were criticised for witholding FOI requests because they believed it would break confidentiality agreements, the consensus from all of the reports on the issue was that the IPCC and UEA data was sound. It is only the tin foil hat brigade that wanted to continue the false premise.....

I guess that you are relying on a Torygraph report in 2009. Shame they got it wrong ( although not surprising)

The irony of the Wail's article was that they were caught deliberately adjusting the slant of a piece that was itself trying to prove the use of inaccurate reporting of data. In otherwords they were decrying the use of innacurate use of data by providing inaccurate graphics and drawing exaggerated conclusions. Probably because they didn't actually understand the report or the data it was trying ( failing) to dispute.

Member for

13 years

Posts: 6,535

Depending on our beliefs, we may or may not have the inclination but, we certainly do not have the means to deflect either man made or natural climate change.

If conclusive evidence pointed to man made interference as the source of global warming, And if the limp wristed Europeans were to shackle themselves to a litany of protective conditions in a Knut like attempt to stem the tide, what do you think the Chinese, the Indians, the Russians and of course the US of A would be doing by way of support ?

Yes, that's right. They'd be joining us in that mad pursuit of industrial immolation. Wouldn't they ? The way ahead is clear. All the industrialised nations of the world would 'come together' (favourite leftie phrase) and sacrifice their hard won commercial progress and destroy the living standards of their citizens - just now, beginning to gather pace - wouldn't they ?

Those whom the God's wish to destroy, they first make mad. Seems to me there's more than an element of that.

Member for

12 years 9 months

Posts: 851

Errrr, John, I am afraid you are behind the times. China and to a smaller extent India are leading the way with efforts to reduce emissions, especially as under Trump it seems that the USA is reneging on it's responsibilities as amongst the worlds highest per capita consumer of energy of the industrialised countries

From your rag of choice:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/31/world-doesnt-need-us-lead-climate-change-action-china-will/

Member for

15 years 10 months

Posts: 686

John, I would agree with you to a point, only in that this old planet of ours has gone through some pretty dramatic climatic changes without the help of humans, BUT it is also clear that we (ie humans) have not been the best thing to happen on this world, we have only fairly recently accepted that we couldn't just continue dumping our rubbish in rivers and streams and believing that the oceans would somehow deal with it, in fact many of our oceans have serious problems with plastics which are contaminating and killing life in the seas, pushing more and more pollutants into the atmosphere is far from a good alternative, do we really want to poison ourselves?.

For me whether you believe or go along with human effects on climate change is immaterial, but cleaning up our polluting ways should be important to all of us/

Member for

6 years 9 months

Posts: 110

Both China and India have planned hundreds of new coal fired power stations over the next few years.

Member for

13 years

Posts: 6,535

Ah ! You mention an entirely different cause and effect Pollution of our oceans is a most serious matter. It is accumulative and long term. Because of those two aspects it presents a lethal threat to the health of the planet.

Atmospheric pollution is an entirely different matter. Toxic and warming gases readily diffuse. Vegetation including trees act as filters and converters thru' the process of photo synthesis. One danger is that we are rapidly converting forested areas to plain and savannah in the interest of cattle rearing and cereal growth thus robbing ourselves of our first line of defence.

I believe that there is a deal of scaremongering about global warming. There appears to be powerful sponsored agencies that are active in promoting a warming agenda. Whether these people are Luddites or, just deluded simpletons I know not. What I do know is that we can't turn back the clock. The days of the horse and carriage are long dead and gone.

Some see the development of electric cars as a potential saviour. I don't. The concept fails at the hurdle of the first rule of physics: you can't get more out than you put in. Until there is a revolution in the storage capability of electrical power, it will be seriously limited and not able to deliver as would be desirable.

Member for

13 years

Posts: 6,535

Hot off the press !

Almost exactly on cue. "Scientists got their modelling wrong !"

This refers to a piece published in Trekkie's favourite paper the D. Tel. (report, 19th Sept. inst) A combined report published in the Nature Geoscience declares that the climate models used to forecast climate change acceleration were wrong. Where have we heard that before ?

Research by British scientists found that the 40 year old forecasts of pollution and warming had been grossly overestimated and that related percentage levels were much less than had been predicted.

I don't wish to throw any spanners but could it be that the fiction of man made global warming is just that and really merely a part of a natural cycle that has been with us since the dawn of time?

Member for

12 years 9 months

Posts: 851

Ah, I was waiting for this, seems you are a day behind as this was reported yesterday. As usual your analysis is flawed. If you read the article and had actually digested the detail rather than the headline, you would have seen that is fo the most part the greater and earlier uptake of renewable energies, particularly in the developing countries that has slowed the temperature rise and the authors accept the concept of man made warming.

Keep up John

Member for

13 years

Posts: 6,535

It's all a question of perspective.

Member for

18 years 11 months

Posts: 963

Back in the day, unless you warranted having a voice (based on knowledge or experience) you didn't get one, nowadays it seems that anybody is fair game. What a poor and laughable non-story from a poor "newspaper". In the days of decent journalism, people stating "It looked like a Russian Bomber" would have been laughed at and not entertained in any way for for an interview.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4910228/Was-Russian-bomber-intercepted-RAF-flying-Cornwall.html

Member for

15 years 10 months

Posts: 686

Surely any "newspaper" of any description would make a few basic checks before splashing lurid and totally false headlines all over the place, must be quiet skies over Penzance, where I live we under one major air corridor, the planes (all commercial) are at altitude and no problem, but with recognition skills like that we would have QRAs every 20 minutes or so at peak times.

Member for

14 years 6 months

Posts: 3,447

Meanwhile the Telegraph keep Teresa's defence of Free Market capitalist dogma very low down in their news. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ - see if you can find the story. They know how shrill it is starting to sound. It is a serious misjudgement on the part of May, very poor politics, she should have just acted like Corbyn hadn't said anything.

"In words aimed at Mr Corbyn, she added: "We should never forget that raising the living standards, and protecting the jobs, of ordinary working people is the central aim of all economic policy.

"Helping each generation to live longer, fuller, more secure lives than the one which went before them. Not serving an abstract doctrine or an ideological concept, but serving the real interests of the British people.”

All this in support of the abstract doctrines of greed is good and trickledown. Funny old world.

I am not a fan if the on-line independent's editorial style, but this is astute: http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/nationalisation-theresa-may-s-speech-in-defence-of-capitalism-proves-that-she-fears-jeremy-corbyn-s-a7971251.html. Not astute enough to see that this reported defense does more than pay Corbyn a compliment, it legitamises the opposition - precisely the opposite of the undermining tactic that Tory central office and its allied press have been employing since the re-emergence of a genuine opposition.

For the unconverted, Labour were not necessarily 'setting the agenda' until May's speech. Now they are. Time to sack more advisers.

In the meantime - doesn't the fact that the stated long-term goals of security and better lives have not been reached on behalf of the post-Thatcher generation suggest the neo-liberal free market experiment has in fact failed - and isn't she rather stupidly highlighting that with this ill-advised knee-jerk?

Member for

15 years 10 months

Posts: 686

Capitalists don't really like "free markets" or competition, what they want are closed deals, cartels, guaranteed returns and as much access to public finances as possible, the capitalist mind set does not crave competition or a level playing field, it's only thought is self profit, no concern for how that is achieved.

Member for

13 years

Posts: 6,535

Catalan independence ? Reports carried in most newspapers.

If it wasn't plain then, it is now. The EU do not like the idea. This matter has been simmering on the back burner for a number of years. The Spanish knew it was in the offing, but instead of devising a strategy to blunt or neutralise the desire for an independence referendum, the Spanish thought they wouldn't be amiss in acquiring some international obloquy via the use of Robocops. They've succeeded.

There is plenty of historical reference for these matters to be decided by armed insurrection. Don't be surprised if this matter follows the same path.

Can you imagine - leap required, if the EU had arrived at possessing a useful federal armed police force, supported by an effective federal military and decided to usefully intervene prior to or post our Brexit referendum ? I would guess that our civilian population, without the support of our military, assuming that we still had one that was in any way effective, would take a very dim view.

As it is, if I were any kind of a Catalan constitutionalist, I would be screaming: "the right of national self determination as endorsed by the Atlantic Charter and the United Nations".

Hard to resist that particular bugle call, even tho' some might comment that Catalonia is not - yet - a nation.

Member for

18 years 11 months

Posts: 963

Problem is JG as is often the case, the newspapers are wide of the mark and not reflecting the reality. There is not a majority for independence nor was the vote legal.

I write this on a beautiful sunny morning in Spain.....