Emma Thompson on Global Warming

[not a warmonger]

The reality is that it is all about promoting the CAP and Trade model (ETS which was conceived by ENRON BTW) which is why people like Lomberg are ostracized.

The thing I find hard to accept that it is predominately the left that are all for this, even though if all the money spent trying to prove this up could have provided reticulated electricity and water to all of the third world, where the IBUKU satellite showed most of the net CO2 emissions coming from.

So straight out Regulations and phase out fossil fuels is the way to go? What "left" do you speak of supports the myth that the market solves all???

 

[Ripper]

So straight out Regulations and phase out fossil fuels is the way to go? What "left" do you speak of supports the myth that the market solves all???

Fossil fuels are good. If we hadn't discovered oil , coal and electricity there would not be a tree or a whale left in the world now .

Reticulated electricity and gas is far better than burning cow dung to cook with.

 

[not a warmonger]

Fossil fuels are good. If we hadn't discovered oil , coal and electricity there would not be a tree or a whale left in the world now .

Reticulated electricity and gas is far better than burning cow dung to cook with.

We would of had the industrial revolution and all the things that result such as population today and the amount of pollution. Fossel fuel are hesting our planet. Rapidly. Ever we die or capitslism dies.

 

[Ripper]

We would of had the industrial revolution and all the things that result such as population today and the amount of pollution. Fossel fuel are hesting our planet. Rapidly. Ever we die or capitslism dies.

Lol , we actually are privileged to live in the best time to be alive. Life expectancy in 1900 was 47 years.

Every earth hour I turn all my lights on to celebrate the great invention , Electricity.

 

[evo]

Ever we die or capitslism dies.

According to your avatar we shouldn't be holding our breath for Late Capitalism?

 

[Schache It Off]

We would of had the industrial revolution and all the things that result such as population today and the amount of pollution. Fossel fuel are hesting our planet. Rapidly. Ever we die or capitslism dies.

See, global warming is a religion, an alternative religion to Christianity/Judaism/Islam etc. It is a form of earth worship that also focuses on the goal of spreading socialism as evident in your post, and in the words of Naomi Klein. This religion, global warming has been particularly embraced by the secular left.

 

[Grin]

You keep banging on about vaccinations. Why? You don't even grasp the consensus argument. There is NO consensus re 2-4c. There is only consensus of the greenhouse gas argument.

FFS, you don't even know what you are arguing about. Just another pavlovian cheerleader.

OK. Andrew Bolt is right and all of the credible climate science is wrong.
Whilst the evil Dr Shukla and his wicked minions earn a cool 31 billion, dollars by peddling fraudulent science.

Reasons why the sensible and sane can't grasp your argument include
1/ they involve ridiculous and irrational conspiracy theories
2/ they require one to be taken in by charlatans and con artists, using the same methods used by big tobacco and Hardy industries to create doubt in the minds of the scientific illiterate? (Although there's no doubt in your mind is there Meds?)

You're a classic example of the incompetent being so incompetent that they can't recognise their own incompetence.
It's called the Dunning -Kruger effect

 

[Grin]

See, global warming is a religion, an alternative religion to Christianity/Judaism/Islam etc. It is a form of earth worship that also focuses on the goal of spreading socialism as evident in your post, and in the words of Naomi Klein. This religion, global warming has been particularly embraced by the secular left.

Yep. It's all a massive conspiracy by communists.
The science is all wrong, just like it was with the harmfulness of tobacco and asbestos and the benefits of vaccinations.

I always tell people if they want to get a quick handle on if your being sold snake oil, just ask for the evidence. If the response is an irrational conspiracy theory, you know your dealing with woo.

Unfortunately for you Tripwire, your bullshit metre isn't terribly sensitive.

 

[apparentlydead]

See, global warming is a religion, an alternative religion to Christianity/Judaism/Islam etc. It is a form of earth worship that also focuses on the goal of spreading socialism as evident in your post, and in the words of Naomi Klein. This religion, global warming has been particularly embraced by the secular left.

I challenge you to post just once without resorting to using the term left.

 

[Lester Burnham]

Lol , we actually are privileged to live in the best time to be alive. Life expectancy in 1900 was 47 years.

Every earth hour I turn all my lights on to celebrate the great invention , Electricity.

The irony of people arguing on the internet that the progress gained from cheap and abundant electricity is bad.

 

[Lebbo73]

Lol , we actually are privileged to live in the best time to be alive. Life expectancy in 1900 was 47 years.

Every earth hour I turn all my lights on to celebrate the great invention , Electricity.

Yep, I love Earth Hour. My power bill increases by 10% in that quarter!

 

[Grin]

The irony of people arguing on the internet that the progress gained from cheap and abundant electricity is bad.

Don't think anyone's arguing that.
(although some of the less intelligent among us might foolishly fall for a straw man argument like this)
The scientific consensus is that current global warming is as a result of human activity

It's the anti science point of view that is arguing strongly against progress in this case. Largely because they've been fooled by the arguments flogged by lobbyists for industries who perceive that they have most to lose through the scientific process.

 

[not a warmonger]

The irony of people arguing on the internet that the progress gained from cheap and abundant electricity is bad.

a hotter uninhabitable world is progress???

 

[not a warmonger]

See, global warming is a religion, an alternative religion to Christianity/Judaism/Islam etc. It is a form of earth worship that also focuses on the goal of spreading socialism as evident in your post, and in the words of Naomi Klein. This religion, global warming has been particularly embraced by the secular left.

religion is faith without good reason. The science of climate change consists of many componets and is enourmous in terms the amount of reaserch and understanding of how our earth operates.

Lets take it back to its fundementals in terms of what we know about CO2. Are you saying you disagree that CO2 is a greenhouse gas?

 

[not a warmonger]

According to your avatar we shouldn't be holding our breath for Late Capitalism?

profit via finance capital as opposed to manufacturing and the age of monopolies are here now.

 

[not a warmonger]

Lol , we actually are privileged to live in the best time to be alive. Life expectancy in 1900 was 47 years.

Every earth hour I turn all my lights on to celebrate the great invention , Electricity.

yeah the "best" is behind us if we say the course with capitalism. It's outlived its usefulness to the masses

 

[Lester Burnham]

a hotter uninhabitable world is progress???

There is no empirical evidence of CO2 driving significant climate change, let alone making the world uninhabitable. But if you don't think cheap and abundant electricity has provided progress for mankind feel free to switch off all your electrical devices.

 

[not a warmonger]

There is no empirical evidence of CO2 driving significant climate change, let alone making the world uninhabitable. But if you don't think cheap and abundant electricity has provided progress for mankind feel free to switch off all your electrical devices.

the emprical evidence is overwhelming. There is just no other explanation why temp are increasing over siad timeframe. It about efficent use of electricity and switching to over renewables quickly .

 

[Lester Burnham]

the emprical evidence is overwhelming

No, it's not. Failed models are not evidence.

There is just no other explanation why temp are increasing over siad timeframe.

Which timeframe? There has been some warming since the little ice age, most of which can be accounted for by natural variability. CO2 levels have continued to rise but satelite data shows the world has not warmed since 2001.

 

[not a warmonger]

No, it's not. Failed models are not evidence.



Which timeframe? There has been some warming since the little ice age, most of which can be accounted for by natural variability. CO2 levels have continued to rise but satelite data shows the world has not warmed since 2001.

why do you say this? Where do you get your information from? natural variability doesnt explain 0.7 rise globally over 200 years

 

[Taylor]

WOW - a solipsist!!!!!

The exact opposite actually.

 

[Grin]

There is no empirical evidence of CO2 driving significant climate change, let alone making the world uninhabitable. But if you don't think cheap and abundant electricity has provided progress for mankind feel free to switch off all your electrical devices.

Perhaps those who think science is rubbish should put their actions where their mouth is and stop using technology.

 

[Lester Burnham]

why do you say this? Where do you get your information from? natural variability doesnt explain 0.7 rise globally over 200 years

The world has been warming since the end of the Little Ice Age around 1870. There have been three significant warming periods since then. However, the IPCC's headline statement is that 'It is extremely likely that more than 50% of the warming since 1951 is due to the increase in greenhouse gases and other anthropogenic forcings together'. Since 1951, warming only occurred during 1975-1998. So effectively the IPCC are using a period of 23 years out of a much longer period of natural or unattributed warming to justify their conclusion. There is no evidence that increased CO2 caused the warming between 1975-1998. It is similar in length and rate of increase to other warming periods that the IPCC does not attribute to rising CO2. The IPCC conclusion depends on the output of climate models which does not qualify as scientific evidence.

If the AGW hypothesis were valid then the models would have predicted the hiatus in warming we have seen since 1998. They didn't and spectacularly so. Von Storch at al. looked at a large range of models and found

that the continued warming stagnation over fifteen years, from 1998 -2012, is no longer consistent with model projections even at the 2% confidence level.​

http://www.academia.edu/4210419/Can_climate_models_explain_the_recent_stagnation_in_global_warming

That's not to say warming will not continue but there is no proof that carbon dioxide is the main driver for it. The models are clearly missing a major factor, which could be a natural phenomenon.

 

[medusala]

OK. Andrew Bolt is right and all of the credible climate science is wrong.

Hopeless straw man. For the last time, there is no science that says 2-4c will happen. Its merely scenarios included in models

You remind me the of the quants who claimed you couldn't have a ten standard deviation event in financial markets. Of course the models were wrong.

Its a very simple point but one that is utterly beyond you. Have you ever studied statistics at all?

The world has been warming since the end of the Little Ice Age around 1870. There have been three significant warming periods since then.

Yes LB another point overlooked by many. The "2c" we are told relates to pre industrial levels. Its a very obvious slight of hand. They are including natural warming as we left LIA in their 2c claim.

So much for the "science", I hardly think ignoring LIA and MWP is great science.

Perhaps those who think science is rubbish should put their actions where their mouth is and stop using technology.

Lol, your supposed science is nothing of the sort. Lester is destroying your argument and you cant even attempt to refute it.

 

[Grin]

Lol, your supposed science is nothing of the sort. Lester is destroying your argument and you cant even attempt to refute it.

I haven't made an argument.
I've simply pointed out that the nut cases on the right who believe laughable conspiracy theories over the overwhelming scientific consensus, are not significantly different from the crazies on the left who do the same.

Like with immunisations, the sane world, has accepted the science regarding the reality of man made global warming.