UK energy future

[DodgyAgent]

You're just a selfish git and all your talk about "the best thing for poor people is not to given them benefits" are just self-serving lies to keep more of your money in your own pocket?

You are getting warm

[DodgyAgent]

Sorry. "Keep more of hard-working contractor families' money in your pocket."

Hotting up

[pjclarke]

BBC as a reference? /ignore :

Absolutely, mustn't let anything inside that delusional bubble ....

[LucidDementia]

Absolutely, mustn't let anything inside that delusional bubble ....

The BBC is a delusional bubble.

[pjclarke]

The BBC is a delusional bubble.

So we add the BBC to all the world's science academies and professional associations, the Nobel Committee, and the Vatican (etc, etc) to the conspiracy.

I wonder you dare walk down the street.

[LucidDementia]

So we add the BBC to all the world's science academies and professional associations, the Nobel Committee, and the Vatican (etc, etc) to the conspiracy.

I wonder you dare walk down the street.

What conspiracy?
Also where do you reach the conclusion I find "all the world's science academies and professional associations" untrustworthy?
The Vatican? Really?
And as for the Nobel Committee - after Obama they're much harder to take seriously.

[DodgyAgent]

So we add the BBC to all the world's science academies and professional associations, the Nobel Committee, and the Vatican (etc, etc) to the conspiracy.

I wonder you dare walk down the street.

It is not a conspiracy. It is the fact that playing the climate change card serves the interest of all of the above

[pjclarke]

Also where do you reach the conclusion I find "all the world's science academies and professional associations" untrustworthy?

Erm, from reading your posts ...

my argument is in fact that the "accepted theories" are not in fact accepted theories.

Preference for the BS 'Oregon Petition' over 'peer-reviewed' claptrap. (your phrase)

Is it (The greenhouse effect) killing the planet as a result of CO2 emissions or otherwise? No evidence anywhere says so.

Description of the IPCC (who assess the science) as 'the very people leading the entire charade'

*my contempt for what you call "climate science" stems from research I conducted

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

the IPCC is not in the business of impartial climate research

100% of the world's science academies and professional associations have endorsed the work and conclusions of the IPCC. You think the IPCC are charlatans. Ergo …..

Still waiting for that example of a failed IPCC prediction, btw

[LucidDementia]

In their own words:

"The role of the IPCC is to assess on a comprehensive, objective, open and transparent basis the
scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of
risk of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation.
IPCC reports should be neutral with respect to policy, although they may need to deal objectively with
scientific, technical and socio-economic factors relevant to the application of particular policies."

Not impartial, focussed on forcing the acceptance of "human induced climate change" on the world and nothing else. They are built entirely on a false premise.
Equation or sod off to Paris.

http://www.populartechnology.net/201...cientists.html

[DodgyAgent]

Erm, from reading your posts ...



Preference for the BS 'Oregon Petition' over 'peer-reviewed' claptrap. (your phrase)



Description of the IPCC (who assess the science) as 'the very people leading the entire charade'







100% of the world's science academies and professional associations have endorsed the work and conclusions of the IPCC. You think the IPCC are charlatans. Ergo …..

Still waiting for that example of a failed IPCC prediction, btw

Has it occurred to you that the climate is always changing?