359 replies to this topic

[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.

[Devonian]

It seems to me that if AGW meant lower taxes several people her would cease to be AGW sceptics

Of course the truth is whether science is right or wrong is nothing to do with tax, tax is being used as a red herring.

[Solar Sausage]

Devonian, on 29 November 2009 - 10:57 , said:

It seems to me that if AGW meant lower taxes several people her would cease to be AGW sceptics

Of course the truth is whether science is right or wrong is nothing to do with tax, tax is being used as a red herring.

The most laughable thing is that BAU will also mean higher taxes and higher energy costs...

[Boar Wrinklestorm]

I find the whole affair a huge oxymoron based on disinegenuity.

If we start of with the fundamental change that must happen: we must help out the under-developing world. The what? I thought development was bad, so why are we trying to de-develop our world, and develop others. It's socialism at it's 'best' take everything to the arithmetic mean so that some bureaucrat can consider it 'fair' and 'equitable'

Are all human beings equal? Patently, no, we are not. I can't run the 100m in less than 10 seconds, and given my propensity to smoke and drink, it is highly unlikely that I will ever be able to. So, to make things 'fair' and 'equitable' we must now weight down those fast runners with lead weights so that I may be able to compete in the Olympics.

Of course, human life is another thing altogether. But, let's face it, if we can't cancel third-world debt what is, if you are really open and honest to yourself, the chances of creating some huge fund to combat something that is yet to occur (worst scale predictions 6C, currently less than 1C warming)

There should be NO Copenhagen conference; but there should be a conference on giving developing countries a fighting chance, by not ripping them off through trade, interest payments, and all of the other things left over from a colonial Europe (and now a colonial USA) They can invest in their own science programs, they can invest in their own sea defenses etc etc then.

But, of course, those that argue against this view, must, necessarily think that by giving an opportunity to these third world countries they will be unable to rise and join humanity on the pinnacle of zillions of years of evolution. And, of course, those that know best must rise up and save us all from ourselves.

And then like a forest, all trees will be kept equal .... by hatchet, axe, and saw.

Edited by VillagePlank, 29 November 2009 - 12:07 .

[Solar Sausage]

I agree with that, VP. IMO, an overblown Climate Conference will achieve absolutely nothing; at least in terms of what actually needs to be achieved!

[Rob]

Pete Tattum, on 29 November 2009 - 11:02 , said:

The most laughable thing is that BAU will also mean higher taxes and higher energy costs...

thats what "global warming" is an excuse to tax us even more!

[Devonian]

VillagePlank, on 29 November 2009 - 12:05 , said:

I find the whole affair a huge oxymoron based on disinegenuity.

If we start of with the fundamental change that must happen: we must help out the under-developing world. The what? I thought development was bad, so why are we trying to de-develop our world, and develop others. It's socialism at it's 'best' take everything to the arithmetic mean so that some bureaucrat can consider it 'fair' and 'equitable'

Is this the 'you want to send us back to the stone' in disguise? But, don't we spend billions on 'third world' aid? Also, is there any sign that (given the trillions pumped into the world economy) that Govts (pluaral, all of them) are against growth? I can't see any evidence.

Quote

Are all human beings equal? Patently, no, we are not. I can't run the 100m in less than 10 seconds, and given my propensity to smoke and drink, it is highly unlikely that I will ever be able to. So, to make things 'fair' and 'equitable' we must now weight down those fast runners with lead weights so that I may be able to compete in the Olympics.{

Otoh, VP, you would expect to be treated fairly and equitably by the law? Or by a company you trade with? I agree human beings aren't equal in terms of height, or weight or girth, and can't be equal by those measure without 'force', but I think we can strive for equality of treament by others of us though law. No?

Quote

Of course, human life is another thing altogether. But, let's face it, if we can't cancel third-world debt what is, if you are really open and honest to yourself, the chances of creating some huge fund to combat something that is yet to occur (worst scale predictions 6C, currently less than 1C warming)

There should be NO Copenhagen conference; but there should be a conference on giving developing countries a fighting chance, by not ripping them off through trade, interest payments, and all of the other things left over from a colonial Europe (and now a colonial USA) They can invest in their own science programs, they can invest in their own sea defenses etc etc then.

But, of course, those that argue against this view, must, necessarily think that by giving an opportunity to these third world countries they will be unable to rise and join humanity on the pinnacle of zillions of years of evolution. And, of course, those that know best must rise up and save us all from ourselves.

And then like a forest, all trees will be kept equal .... by hatchet, axe, and saw.

The thing is all the environmentalist orgs, ngos, groups are in favour of what you want - to give the 'third world' a fair chance - and concerned about you know what.

Edited by Devonian, 29 November 2009 - 12:54 .

[noggin]

Devonian, on 29 November 2009 - 10:57 , said:

It seems to me that if AGW meant lower taxes several people her would cease to be AGW sceptics

Of course the truth is whether science is right or wrong is nothing to do with tax, tax is being used as a red herring.

I trust that you do not include me in "several people", Dev. Whilst I cannot afford to pay more tax, there are quite a few more aspects to my dis-ease with the perpetuation of the AGW/CC business than just the financial aspect. It is in my pocket, though, that the greatest pain will be felt, if taxes are to rise. Things are very tight here.

Might have known I could rely on you to provide a trite response though.

Quite interesting though, on further consideration, that you comment that sceptics might cease to be sceptical if it meant lower taxes. In the past, it has been said (not by you, I hasten to add)that sceptics are sceptical because they prefer cold weather to hot weather.

I can only infer, then, that as a sceptic, I am a tight-fisted, money-grubbing cold-lover.

Not too far from the truth, actually.

But it is coincidental.

[Devonian]

noggin, on 29 November 2009 - 12:59 , said:

I trust that you do not include me in "several people", Dev. Whilst I cannot afford to pay more tax, there are quite a few more aspects to my dis-ease with the perpetuation of the AGW/CC business than just the financial aspect. It is in my pocket, though, that the greatest pain will be felt, if taxes are to rise. Things are very tight here.

We share that much in common.

Quote

Might have known I could rely on you to provide a trite response though.

And you a little dig at me?

Quote

Quite interesting though, on further consideration, that you comment that sceptics might cease to be sceptical if it meant lower taxes. In the past, it has been said (not by you, I hasten to add)that sceptics are sceptical because they prefer cold weather to hot weather.

I can only infer, then, that as a sceptic, I am a tight-fisted, money-grubbing cold-lover.

Not too far from the truth, actually.

But it is coincidental.

I used to love cold weather, a regular snow nut indeed, but less so now as I begin to be feel the cold a bit more.

[laserguy]

VillagePlank, on 29 November 2009 - 12:05 , said:

And then like a forest, all trees will be kept equal .... by hatchet, axe, and saw.

Hey VP,completely OT but an opportunity for a little relief - did you lift that line from this ?



True visionaries - how could they have foreseen 'Copenhagen' way back in the 70's,and at the height of the next ice-age scare,at that?! A great tune from the finest rock band ever,too!

[Gray-Wolf]

laserguy, on 29 November 2009 - 16:19 , said:

You lid wearin' hippy!!!!

Always enjoyed a good Rush............

Nowt will happen as a consequence of Copenhagen.

Midnight oils will be burnt, agreements will finally be thrashed out but nothing will change .......until it has too.

This will probably please the folk who do not feel that humanity has had the capacity to alter global climate.Once it is seen to be happening ,beyond all reasonable doubt, then they will happily consent to having their skins saved (I believe).

Sadly ,by that point, it will be too late for many millions across the globe and ,soon after that ,for the rest of us.

Change is inevitable, it has ,does, and will always occur.

Just not at the pace we have driven it.

[laserguy]

Gray-Wolf, on 29 November 2009 - 16:40 , said:

You lid wearin' hippy!!!!

Ye that's me,or would be if me mobike wasn't still busted! Still saving up the pennies after all this time but there's always something more important (eh??) that crops up family-wise. And everyone thinks I'm a loaded denier! Dunno what,if anything will be 'achieved' at Copenhagen,but you can rest assured it won't be un the interests of influencing the climate of the planet,GW!

[Gray-Wolf]

laserguy, on 29 November 2009 - 16:58 , said:

Ye that's me,or would be if me mobike wasn't still busted! Still saving up the pennies after all this time but there's always something more important (eh??) that crops up family-wise. And everyone thinks I'm a loaded denier! Dunno what,if anything will be 'achieved' at Copenhagen,but you can rest assured it won't be un the interests of influencing the climate of the planet,GW!

Sorry to hear of your bike woes.....family just don't understand what it means to be robbed of your wheels....esp. if a C.O.D. part would have you back in the saddle after a couple of late nights fighting with it whilst fitting it!!!

I think we appear to agree that the meet is a waste of time and (our) money.

[Boar Wrinklestorm]

laserguy, on 29 November 2009 - 16:19 , said:

Hey VP,completely OT but an opportunity for a little relief - did you lift that line from this ?



True visionaries - how could they have foreseen 'Copenhagen' way back in the 70's,and at the height of the next ice-age scare,at that?! A great tune from the finest rock band ever,too!

Certainly did And the line about "those who know what's best for us must rise and save us up from ourselves" ... same band, check out Moving Pictures\Witchhunt.

... and Red Barchetta is a song about the eventually banning of carbon based cars, and that driving one becoming a guilty secret in the not too distant future.

[Boar Wrinklestorm]

Devonian, on 29 November 2009 - 12:45 , said:

Is this the 'you want to send us back to the stone' in disguise? But, don't we spend billions on 'third world' aid? Also, is there any sign that (given the trillions pumped into the world economy) that Govts (pluaral, all of them) are against growth? I can't see any evidence.

Well, according to here the scale of third world debt is a $trillion. You want to sod around tweaking this and tweaking that (when I say you I am treated you as a representative of the far-left green movement, here - so apologies if that is inaccurate) by sorting out the speck of dust in others eyes, and, yet, the plank in our eyes, the elephant in the room, is $523b debt burden left to repay at the rate of $13 to $1 with $550b already paid.

So, tell me, please, what;s the odd ten's of billions actually going to achieve? Give the third world the opportunity to find it's own path by cancelling the loans - forget Copenhagen.

Quote

Otoh, VP, you would expect to be treated fairly and equitably by the law? Or by a company you trade with? I agree human beings aren't equal in terms of height, or weight or girth, and can't be equal by those measure without 'force', but I think we can strive for equality of treament by others of us though law. No?

What's the law got to do with it? Law is an arbitrary means of controlling society. People are not treated fairly and equitably by the law.

Quote

The thing is all the environmentalist orgs, ngos, groups are in favour of what you want - to give the 'third world' a fair chance - and concerned about you know what.

But all these people have taken their eye off the elephant in the room - third-world debt. Why isn't it reported? All those lobby groups in the Westminster village and to what effect? Trying to build a consensus for high tax/socialist policies - which, as history has taught us - will bring a country to it's knees, and then we'll have no option but to up the interest rate to third world countries.

Edited by VillagePlank, 30 November 2009 - 11:11 .

[noggin]

....and with just 7 days to go until lift-off, here is what the MetO think about it all

http://www.metoffice...r20091124a.html


I have tried desperately to fathom out from whence they are coming but have failed miserably.
So, I will leave it here in case anyone wants to read it and if anyone can fathom it out, please enlighten me.

Thank you so much, in anticipation.

P.S. Here is a taster....

"Year-on-year, the evidence is growing that damaging climate and weather events - potentially intensified by global warming - are already happening and begining to affect society and ecosystems."



.....and another.....

"This year's unusually destructive typhoon season in SouthEast Asia, while not easy to attribute directly to climate change, illustrates the vulnerabilities to such events."



The opening section of the release seems to confirm that dangerous climate change is here, is proven and is getting worse.

Yet further on, as in the 2 sentences that I have quoted (there were more, but hey ho), there seems to be a lot of dithering about, see those bits which I have emboldened.

I can't fathom it out.

Maybe it's just me...........

[Solar Sausage]

I don't think I'll comment just yet, Val... I think I will leave it until after a few extra hundred jet-airliners have needlessly circumnavigated the globe...

[Solar Cycles]

noggin, on 30 November 2009 - 12:17 , said:

....and with just 7 days to go until lift-off, here is what the MetO think about it all

http://www.metoffice...r20091124a.html


I have tried desperately to fathom out from whence they are coming but have failed miserably.
So, I will leave it here in case anyone wants to read it and if anyone can fathom it out, please enlighten me.

Thank you so much, in anticipation.

P.S. Here is a taster....

"Year-on-year, the evidence is growing that damaging climate and weather events - potentially intensified by global warming - are already happening and begining to affect society and ecosystems."



.....and another.....

"This year's unusually destructive typhoon season in SouthEast Asia, while not easy to attribute directly to climate change, illustrates the vulnerabilities to such events."



The opening section of the release seems to confirm that dangerous climate change is here, is proven and is getting worse.

Yet further on, as in the 2 sentences that I have quoted (there were more, but hey ho), there seems to be a lot of dithering about, see those bits which I have emboldened.

I can't fathom it out.

Maybe it's just me...........

Aye, the old bull $*** meter will be going into overdrive, within the next 7 days! Time to avoid all media outlets for one week me thinks!

Edited by Solar Cycles, 30 November 2009 - 12:33 .