359 replies to this topic

[stewfox]

Well folks the soon to be climate change conference will be soon be upon us.

December 7th -18th

http://en.cop15.dk/

What would you like to see happen ?

Postpone for another 10 years and see if anything is happening to the climate?.

Or spend trillions on flawed scientific data ?.

Edited by stewfox, 25 November 2009 - 15:07 .

[Solar Cycles]

stewfox, on 25 November 2009 - 15:06 , said:

Well folks the soon to be climate change conference will be soon be upon us.

December 7th -18th

http://en.cop15.dk/

What would you like to see happen ?

Postpone for another 10 years and see if anything is happening to the climate?.

Or spend trillions on flawed scientific data ?.

If only Guy Fawkes was still around!

[Solar Sausage]

Solar Cycles, on 25 November 2009 - 16:44 , said:

If only Guy Fawkes was still around!

Boom! Boom!

[jonboy]

Its rather telling that Obama will attend the opening but will not be present at the end

[noggin]

9 days to go. I'll be frank. I am scared of what might happen as a result of this summit. Please, don't anyone respond with trite comments such as "you'll be more scared of what happens if no action is taken".

I would like there to be sensible and workable programmes coming out of the summit, such as working towards cleaner fuels and a generally less polluting lifestyle, and using the currently available research money more wisely. Perhaps they could even arrange for future summits to be held by video technology and also bring in a rule re the number of journalists any one organisation can send to cover the summit.

I am frightened that there are going to be a lot of AGW/CC extremists there, both on the podiums and off the podiums and I fear that that those taking part in the summit will agree to increase taxes and put further restrictions on our lives in order to "halt climate change", and that this will be as much a "face-saving" exercise as anything else. (I will try to dig out my old Tolstoy quote re this.)

I am a caring and thoughtful person and I and my family live as clean and non-polluting lives as we can. But there are other things that we have to take into consideration, besides the environment, and I cannot afford to pay more taxes on stuff. I used to smoke, but it became so expensive that I haven't had a cigarette for over 5 months now. I have got my petrol usage down to £7 per week, which is excellent. Luckily I live within walking distance of work and seldom drive there. The cost of food is frightening....so much of it has doubled in price over the last year or two. I cannot afford to pay more taxes and I am scared about what will come from this summit.

It's all very well these politicians deciding to do this, that and the other, when they are very comfortably off and charge all their living expenses to the taxpayer, but what about the low-earners? What about the poor sods who've lost their jobs in this bloody recession. Tax revenues are already plummetting like a stone. I hope and pray (yes, I pray!) that common sense will prevail.

[Solar Sausage]

Perhaps they're have a pre-conference junket, in a luxury liner, off the East coast the USA...It would account for that 'odd' +ive SST anomaly???

[Solar Cycles]

noggin, on 28 November 2009 - 09:35 , said:

9 days to go. I'll be frank. I am scared of what might happen as a result of this summit. Please, don't anyone respond with trite comments such as "you'll be more scared of what happens if no action is taken".

I would like there to be sensible and workable programmes coming out of the summit, such as working towards cleaner fuels and a generally less polluting lifestyle, and using the currently available research money more wisely. Perhaps they could even arrange for future summits to be held by video technology and also bring in a rule re the number of journalists any one organisation can send to cover the summit.

I am frightened that there are going to be a lot of AGW/CC extremists there, both on the podiums and off the podiums and I fear that that those taking part in the summit will agree to increase taxes and put further restrictions on our lives in order to "halt climate change", and that this will be as much a "face-saving" exercise as anything else. (I will try to dig out my old Tolstoy quote re this.)

I am a caring and thoughtful person and I and my family live as clean and non-polluting lives as we can. But there are other things that we have to take into consideration, besides the environment, and I cannot afford to pay more taxes on stuff. I used to smoke, but it became so expensive that I haven't had a cigarette for over 5 months now. I have got my petrol usage down to £7 per week, which is excellent. Luckily I live within walking distance of work and seldom drive there. The cost of food is frightening....so much of it has doubled in price over the last year or two. I cannot afford to pay more taxes and I am scared about what will come from this summit.

It's all very well these politicians deciding to do this, that and the other, when they are very comfortably off and charge all their living expenses to the taxpayer, but what about the low-earners? What about the poor sods who've lost their jobs in this bloody recession. Tax revenues are already plummeting like a stone. I hope and pray (yes, I pray!) that common sense will prevail.

Your right to be concerned noggin, for all the huffing and puffing you find on climate forums, it's those elitist liberals who will decide how to cripple economies even further. An interesting piece by Mike Hulme over on WUWT, who states that the IPCC should now be disbanded, due to it's political preferences over scientific one's! Now if someone of Mike Hulmes capacity is saying this, then we really are in trouble!

[Gray-Wolf]

Nothing will be agreed upon. Any agreements will be reneged upon. CO2 will continue to outstrip the Worst case scenario plot.

If you thin you can't afford food now Nog's just wait until the first major crop impacts (and not just the piffling shortages of the past 2 years).

We're Fugged and no -one cares.

Ho Hum .

[Boar Wrinklestorm]

Gray-Wolf, on 28 November 2009 - 13:39 , said:

Nothing will be agreed upon. Any agreements will be reneged upon. CO2 will continue to outstrip the Worst case scenario plot.

If you thin you can't afford food now Nog's just wait until the first major crop impacts (and not just the piffling shortages of the past 2 years).

We're Fugged and no -one cares.

Ho Hum .

Oh dear ... "The Day After Tomorrow" was not a documentary, GW ....

[Solar Sausage]

VillagePlank, on 28 November 2009 - 13:43 , said:

Oh dear ... "The Day After Tomorrow" was not a documentary, GW ....

Maybe not, VP...But 2012 is???

[Boar Wrinklestorm]

Pete Tattum, on 28 November 2009 - 13:47 , said:

Maybe not, VP...But 2012 is???

Haven't seen that one yet - perhaps I should buy some tickets to Copenhagen; I'm sure someone somewhere will be showing both films as an afternoon matinee.

[Solar Sausage]

I think the idea is that (due to some remakable celestial mechanics) the Earth suddenly stops rotating...Oddly enough though, although tectonic plates and ocean masses etc get flung around a lot, people don't fly off the planet and into outer space????

That said, there are no fancy graphics showing the Atlantic Conveyor running in reverse!

[Boar Wrinklestorm]

Pete Tattum, on 28 November 2009 - 13:58 , said:

I think the idea is that (due to some remakable celestial mechanics) the Earth suddenly stops rotating...Oddly enough though, although tectonic plates and ocean masses etc get flung around a lot, people don't fly off the planet and into outer space????

That said, there are no fancy graphics showing the Atlantic Conveyor running in reverse!

I am fairly certain that it's in someway related to bovine flatulence, and since women have increased bovine stocks, at least this disaster will be woman-made disaster rather than a man-made one. I still think our half of the species gets a particularly raw deal ....

Edited by VillagePlank, 28 November 2009 - 14:01 .

[noggin]

VillagePlank, on 28 November 2009 - 14:01 , said:

I am fairly certain that it's in someway related to bovine flatulence, and since women have increased bovine stocks, at least this disaster will be woman-made disaster rather than a man-made one. I still think our half of the species gets a particularly raw deal ....

Not sure what you're on about here, VP old chap............

[Dartmoor_Matt]

I think the general premise is that in 2012 the world ends. This has rather 'worringly' be thrown up by quite a few civilisations, most of them a long time ago, so probably picked a date out of thin air... but does rather beg the question. Just not sure which one.

Either way, best not too worry too much about climate meltdown until after this date, by which time the effects from the sun will be showing a marked cool down, and the 99% of scientists who claim personmade global warming will be the death of us will all be signing on at the job centre. Possibly.

Would make a good film eh?

[Roger J Smith]

People need to wake up to the fact that this whole process represents the imposition of higher taxes and probably lower incomes, all in the name of a dubious outcome, but much more to the point, in an effort to create a whole new level of actual government in the world, whether it is declared or otherwise ... so that most of the younger generation today are facing a much bleaker economic future than they should, just to please the combined ego needs of some scientists, and the more sinister capital needs of some very powerful and shadowy people pulling strings in the background.

Anyone who speaks out about this can expect to have the usual choir singing loudly to try to drown us out, and the MSM have no clue -- they never have had a clue on this issue, and continue to do the bidding of the scientists involved, and the shadowy figures too. One has to wonder what the payoff is besides "saving the planet" because it seems like no coincidence whatsoever that over half the educated public have grown suspicious of this fraud, while almost nobody in the "chattering classes" seems to have had similar doubts.

Copenhagen is not "humanity's last chance to save the planet" but perhaps one of the last opportunities for free people to save their freedom, and maintain the right to decide for themselves how they will live, and whom they will serve.

My country is just as far up the elephant's rear end as yours is -- but there are signs of cracks in the facade of the imperial palace. Conservatives generally "get" this issue, but really, it is the democratic left that needs to wake up and smell the coffee here, it is working class people who will be consigned to wage slavery by these ruinous policies, and just as in the former Soviet Union, the people who are most likely to swallow the kool aid are the last to realize that it is poisoning them -- initially, they think the critics deserve their fate. But when the critics are all gone to the Gulag or the grave, then they realize, way too late, who is really pulling the strings and why.

The British people could play a key role in this whole situation. You must all be sick to death of being neck deep in political correctness, but you have a long tradition of free speech. USE IT OR LOSE IT.

[LomondSnowstorm]

I agree with every word you said, Roger. I think the only reasonable outcome from this is the Russians, Indians and Chinese walking out, leaving the entire Summit with the little problem of trying to reduce emissions without at least half the contributors of CO2 refusing to budge! How is it democracy for our Prime Minister and Environment Secretary and newly 'crowned' president of Europe to try and find a solution for a problem over half the people they represent do not believe exists? This is the height of absurdity, and we're very fortunate that a 'resolution' is unlikely to occur, otherwise we could've found ourselves with another layer of world bureacracy that nobody elected or wanted, not to mention the insane task (which we in Scotland are in fact legally bound to) of cutting emissions by 80% in 40 years with only vague concepts being bandied about to explain how this could possibly happen. Energy must be sustainable, but we still need to fufill our short-term needs in the meantime. The technology will become more efficient, cheaper and widely available in the coming years (we must hope), but setting ourselves risky, unattainable targets and increasing unelected bureacracy will help no one, most certainly not democracy.

[laserguy]

LomondSnowstorm, on 29 November 2009 - 00:34 , said:

I agree with every word you said, Roger...........

Me too. What I completely fail to understand is the number of people (the figure we'll never know,but there's a good few on here!),ordinary people,who not only believe in the whole AGW sham but defend it to the hilt and get very upset when it is questioned. What's in it for them,and why can't they see that they're tightening the noose around their own necks?

[Solar Cycles]

Roger J Smith, on 29 November 2009 - 00:00 , said:

People need to wake up to the fact that this whole process represents the imposition of higher taxes and probably lower incomes, all in the name of a dubious outcome, but much more to the point, in an effort to create a whole new level of actual government in the world, whether it is declared or otherwise ... so that most of the younger generation today are facing a much bleaker economic future than they should, just to please the combined ego needs of some scientists, and the more sinister capital needs of some very powerful and shadowy people pulling strings in the background.

Anyone who speaks out about this can expect to have the usual choir singing loudly to try to drown us out, and the MSM have no clue -- they never have had a clue on this issue, and continue to do the bidding of the scientists involved, and the shadowy figures too. One has to wonder what the payoff is besides "saving the planet" because it seems like no coincidence whatsoever that over half the educated public have grown suspicious of this fraud, while almost nobody in the "chattering classes" seems to have had similar doubts.

Copenhagen is not "humanity's last chance to save the planet" but perhaps one of the last opportunities for free people to save their freedom, and maintain the right to decide for themselves how they will live, and whom they will serve.

My country is just as far up the elephant's rear end as yours is -- but there are signs of cracks in the facade of the imperial palace. Conservatives generally "get" this issue, but really, it is the democratic left that needs to wake up and smell the coffee here, it is working class people who will be consigned to wage slavery by these ruinous policies, and just as in the former Soviet Union, the people who are most likely to swallow the kool aid are the last to realize that it is poisoning them -- initially, they think the critics deserve their fate. But when the critics are all gone to the Gulag or the grave, then they realize, way too late, who is really pulling the strings and why.

The British people could play a key role in this whole situation. You must all be sick to death of being neck deep in political correctness, but you have a long tradition of free speech. USE IT OR LOSE IT.

Excellent stuff Roger. For the life in me, I too can't understand what the pay off is for all those who won't tolerate a descending voice, on a theory that is far from clear cut!


I genuinely fear the outcome of Copenhagen, when you have someone of Mike Hulme's stature calling for an end to the IPCC. You then realise just how political this whole bandwagon has become. I just hope some politicians find the balls to stand up to this charade!

Edited by Solar Cycles, 29 November 2009 - 08:01 .

[noggin]

laserguy, on 29 November 2009 - 07:38 , said:

Me too. What I completely fail to understand is the number of people (the figure we'll never know,but there's a good few on here!),ordinary people,who not only believe in the whole AGW sham but defend it to the hilt and get very upset when it is questioned. What's in it for them,and why can't they see that they're tightening the noose around their own necks?

The following is, I think, a goodly chunk of the reason for the continuation of the sham, and it is in the words of Leo Tolstoy, who put it so well (this is at least the third time that I have quoted this on NW!)



"I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives."


Add to this the security of income, and Bob's yer uncle.