UK energy future

[LucidDementia]

Tell me, is it only climate science you dismiss, or does your contempt for the literature extend to all disciplines? And why?

I dismiss the endless drivel spouted by many of those with agendas.
As for why? There is only one truth. Anything else is a lie.

Just to clarify, my contempt for what you call "climate science" stems from research I conducted more than a decade ago. Once one has been able to establish that an entire movement is based on lies and has a specific agenda the detail becomes less than irrelevant, you just kinda sit back and watch events unfold, and in this case it gets sillier by the day.
This is true of many things but if you are suggesting I have contempt for reasoned science you're way off the mark. I love astrophysics for example, but the difference there is that theories in that field can be assisted by experimentation and observation. Fascinating stuff.
Your climate science will apparently be assisted by something that will happen, honest. Except it doesn't. When that changes I might take notice.

Nice stealth ad-hom by the way.

[pjclarke]

Your climate science will apparently be assisted by something that will happen, honest. Except it doesn't. When that changes I might take notice.

The melting Arctic? The cooling stratosphere? The hottest month on record? I would go on but you would just ignore the evidence that does not slot into your predetermined world view.

This 'research', is it reproducible? Falsifiable?

[EternalOptimist]

The melting Arctic? The cooling stratosphere? The hottest month on record? I would go on but you would just ignore the evidence that does not slot into your predetermined world view.

This 'research', is it reproducible? Falsifiable?

The melting Arctic?

The cooling stratosphere?

The hottest month on record?


I would go on

you do, YOU DO



ooh me ribs

[LucidDementia]

The melting Arctic? The cooling stratosphere? The hottest month on record? I would go on but you would just ignore the evidence that does not slot into your predetermined world view.

Evidence that the climate changes is not evidence that humanity is changing the climate. No amount of "literature" will change that.

This 'research', is it reproducible? Falsifiable?

Christ on a bike.
Why would I falsify research conducted by me for my own benefit? You seem to be leaping to the conclusion I was conducting scientific research into ACC or AGW or whatever you nutters are calling it this week.

I was conducting research of available information in order to figure out, through critical thinking, if it was the truth or a lie.
Now you expect me to either change my view or revisit my research because the same people are saying something ever so slightly different with the same agenda. Which has for reasons unknown to me become your personal agenda and crusade.

This leads me to two questions, and they're not digs at all, but how old are you and what do you drive?

[pjclarke]

Evidence that the climate changes is not evidence that humanity is changing the climate. No amount of "literature" will change that.



Christ on a bike.
Why would I falsify research conducted by me for my own benefit? You seem to be leaping to the conclusion I was conducting scientific research into ACC or AGW or whatever you nutters are calling it this week.

I was conducting research of available information in order to figure out, through critical thinking, if it was the truth or a lie.
Now you expect me to either change my view or revisit my research because the same people are saying something ever so slightly different with the same agenda. Which has for reasons unknown to me become your personal agenda and crusade.

This leads me to two questions, and they're not digs at all, but how old are you and what do you drive?

I refer you to Feynman on reproducibility (not to mention his famous quote about fooling yourself) and Popper on falsifiability.

Agenda I grant you, but crusade? If you read back a few of my posts you'll discover (a) they are nearly always a response to correct some denier bulltulip, and (b) I've never once tried to influence behaviour.

A Honda Insight.

[LucidDementia]

I refer you to Feynman on reproducibility (not to mention his famous quote about fooling yourself) and Popper on falsifiability.

Agenda I grant you, but crusade? If you read back a few of my posts you'll discover (a) they are nearly always a response to correct some denier bulltulip, and (b) I've never once tried to influence behaviour.

A Honda Insight.

You have utterly ignored the fact that this was not scientific research. Standard.
Hybrids are bad mmmmkay.


And you have the nerve to suggest I'm fooling myself?

I also asked your age, which you have declined to offer.

[pjclarke]

You have utterly ignored the fact that this was not scientific research. Standard.
Hybrids are bad mmmmkay.


And you have the nerve to suggest I'm fooling myself?

I also asked your age, which you have declined to offer.

After you accused me of ad hom. I fail to see what my date of birth adds to the discussion.

[pjclarke]

Marginally more relevant

Yes, the Paris climate change conference can save the planet | Ed Miliband | Comment is free | The Guardian

[DodgyAgent]

After you accused me of ad hom. I fail to see what my date of birth adds to the discussion.

You have no interest in climate change just the power and control it yields by frightening people into submission. You take a tiny snapshot of weather patterns from a few years and apply them as the template evidence of your anti capitalist theme. You take every example of an extreme statistic of weather behaviour and spin it into a trend to pursue your agenda despite the fact that the climate has been changing for billions of years.

The ad hominen argument is your favourite for countering unpalatable arguments that you do not like or undermine your position yet you happily ignore the fact that the vast majority of the people supporting your theories are in fact paid to do so.

You have zero tolerance of any counter argument behaving like the central controller of a stasi run propaganda centre from a communist dictatorship.

[pjclarke]

You have no interest in climate change just the power and control it yields by frightening people into submission. You take a tiny snapshot of weather patterns from a few years and apply them as the template evidence of your anti capitalist theme. You take every example of an extreme statistic of weather behaviour and spin it into a trend to pursue your agenda despite the fact that the climate has been changing for billions of years.

The ad hominen argument is your favourite for countering unpalatable arguments that you do not like or undermine your position yet you happily ignore the fact that the vast majority of the people supporting your theories are in fact paid to do so.

You have zero tolerance of any counter argument behaving like the central controller of a stasi run propaganda centre from a communist dictatorship.

I am not anti-capitalist.

HTH.