Are we being manipulated?

[ratewhore]

We may not be able to meet all our needs, but we could rapidly reduce our dependency on fossil fuels by 20-30% and in the long term develope other sources of bio-fuel. like the guy in the USA who processes waste turkey giblets, fat & skin into bio-diesel (he gets about a barrel out of every ton). He reckoned that, by reprocessing all the organic waste it currently produces, the USA could meet ALL its fuel requirements.

Shades of 'Back to the Future' there...

[vista]

This is the Problem

Look, maybe global warming stuff is all hype, but the reality is that climate HAS become warmer and not to do anything is playing with huge risk that is very real and it will cost UK probably more than any other country. So to argue about whether it is really man made activity or not is stupid because the impact of the case IF it is man made (and there is enough evidence for any rational person for that) is so big that some serious steps should be done now.

1. I don't accept that the climate has warmed outside of the normal range for the planet, please provide evidence that it has? Rather than the usual vilification reserved for those that disagree with the herd.

2. The messengers of doom are not plausible, just another bunch of ex-CND'ers and vested interests. They passionately marched in their 100,000's to ban the bomb because we were all going to die in a nuclear holocast, but we didn't ban it and we didn't die. Were 100's of thousands of passionate, smart, intelligent, yep you guessed it the same sort of unimpeachable people trotted out for Global Warming today wrong? err well yes they were, completely wrong.

3. The taxes will be very real and very high, just what are they going to do with the money raised?

4. If we accept the flimsy unproven premise that GW is a dangerous reality what exactly can we do about it? If we turn off our economy and produce no emssions it will have virtually no impact so punative taxes which fall far short of turning off our economy will almost certainly have no environmental impact at all - so a lot of pain for virtually no gain - can someone explain how this isn't just self-flagellation?

A huge number of people like nothing better than campaigning about something, anything really it doesn't matter, when they hook up with the large number of people that just adore telling other people what to do, add to these the 'general herd' and the politicians join in its not going to be pretty.

Collectively we need a steady nerve and calm disposition to see beyond the vested interests and the passionate people to see if there is actually a problem and if we are able to affect it in any way at all.

I predict that we do not possess a steady nerve nor the ability to withstand the current onslaught so we'll go ultra-green, we'll all feel a lot of pain (except the indivdual groups I've mentioned) and absolutely nothing environmentally will happen or change beyond the usual range of global climate behaviour.

[zathras]

It occurs to me that this whole report may have been written by starting with the assumption that Global Warming is a fact and then looking for the proof.

I cam across this from the Telegraph

An example of the hysteria is the plain bad science and even worse economics paraded as unassailable fact in the media this week. Earlier this summer, Sir Nicholas Stern said: "To tackle this problem we will need all the economics we have learned and then some more." Yet the Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change, whose projections Sir Nicholas uses extensively in his report, was roundly criticised in last year's House Of Lords Select Committee on Economic Affairs for some of its more extreme extrapolations and its failure to acknowledge dissenting voices. Let us not forget that these apocalyptic forecasts are exactly that: forecasts.

So acknowledging that Sir Nicholas Stern is an economist and the foundation of his report is based on poor science, what price the eventual conclusions?

The glee with which Tony Blair has seized this would see seem to indicate that it is the opportunity to increase taxes rather than improve the environment is the bit he likes best.

The fact that the sactimonous twaddle he spoke about other countries doing their bit is at best going to amuse them rather than anything else. That the biggest polluters are going to go right on and soon swallow up any improvement made by the poor besieged British taxpayer.

30 years ago we were all told that we were entering a new ice age and we need to deal with that. Now it's global warming! 30 years is nothing in geological terms and the roughly 300 years that we have had industry a mear pinprick. The world was getting warmer before industrialisation.

The thing is we need to reduce the use of carbon based fuels for a far simpler and less esoteric reason than Global Warming (if indeed that exists). Simply put eventually the carbon fuel(s) are going to run out. It may happen in 30 years, it may be in 300 years but they will run out.

And what of the poor person who buys a 4x4 with a hybrid engine (when one exists). Are they going to get saddled with the same extra taxes of other 4x4. Told you, this is just about incresing taxes.

[Ardesco]

It's all a load of tosh, recycling is a valid way to "save the earth". reducing CO2 is not really going to change much. Soon we will be having "Green Warriors" in an all out battle against "Animal Rights Activists" with the former starting a campain to stick a cork up every cows bum to stop them farting and releasing "dangerous" greenhouse gasses while the animal rights lot decry the cruelty of sticking corks up cows bums and campaigning for the right to fart....

The biggest joke about all of this is that the green mob scream and shout about the use of fossil fuels and how much damage they do to the earth but suggest nuclear and they make an even bigger fuss. Nuclear is far cleaner, far more efficient and if burried underground and kept away from the population reasonably safe. Why aren't the green mob demanding we build more nuclear power stations???

[DimPrawn]

Happy birthday Ardesco.

[Buffoon]

More from the Telegraph.

I used to be willing to believe all this global warming stuff. Now I think it's just more socialist crap.

There may be very good reasons to do 'green' things. But it has been hi-jacked by anti-capitalists.

[Emperor Dalek]

Look, Buffoon, just stop bucking the universal consensus and pay your green taxes. There are literally millions of unfunded public sector pensions out there. Just you wait and see, as soon as I introduce those taxes climate catastrophe will fail to appear so I will have been right and you wrong.

Gordon Brown.

[Ardesco]

Happy birthday Ardesco.

Cheers DP

[DimPrawn]

Human cause of global warming

Can anyone point me to sound scientific evidence that global warming today is caused by man made activity?

If man did not exist, how much of today's global warming would be present?

If man ceased all global warming activity, what would be the result?

How much of global warming is due to CO2 and how much is due to other causes (other gases, natural cycles, etc)?

Personally I do not see any evidence to suggest that stopping all CO2 emmissions would reverse the global trend for warming.

I think there is more truth to the 45 minutes to deploy WoMD than man-made global warming and all this sudden focus on Carbon emissions and TAXATION.

[Emperor Dalek]

Look DP, I'm going to put up taxes whether you like it or not and I bet you a chip to a bagful that the imminent environmental apocalypse then fails to appear, sorry, is averted.

Surely then the only conclusion is that I was right and you were wrong.

On top of that, all those town hall staff will be able to retire on full pensions at 50. So you see, it really is win-win, and you filthy disgusting middle classes with your Chelsea tractors and new build 4 bedroom executive houses will be the biggest winners of all, as you can relax in the warm glow of your own selflessness.

Gordon Brown.