Re: Global warming
 

the other thing that amuses me about this whole "climategate" festival of dim-wittedness is the suggestion that the global HQ for the biggest, most spectacular, most far-reaching fraud/conspiracy ever perpetrated by mankind is in .....Norwich.

Re: Global warming
 

I think you'll find an awful lot of companies have a vested interest in making money out of the climate change agenda, that's why I said a good well meaning idea appears to have been hijacked. Climate change will be a multi billian dollar industry.

Re: Global warming
 

I'll agree with the confused bit.

I'll assume you voted "Global warming is a natural process, contribution of human activity is substantial".

The next question is..... Will a tax fix the problem ? As that is the main thing being done about it, as far as everyone sees...

Re: Global warming
 

Let's face it, it's very convenient for us in the West with our lives of excess to dismiss our impact on the planet. We need to get past this selfishness for the sake of our children and their children.

Re: Global warming
 

Apparently the unit in Norwich are quite influential in the field, despite your dismissal of them. If you have hours to kill, or terminal insomnia, these are the emails in question.


http://www.eastangliaemails.com/index.php

Re: Global warming
 

Some interesting reading about scientific honesty, peer-review process... ClimateGate part 1: Background

Re: Global warming
 

Interesting resort to name calling again - have you not read even any of the emails? The CRU is one of the leading departments in the world and if you check the emails you will see the links with other international departments to make this a very closed shop indeed. I dont pretend to understand the code but that has well qualified people scratching their heads as well - a real GIGO from all accounts.

This group - international as it is - are guilty of fraud, pure and simple. Now that the fraud is out in the open, scientists who have been too scared to voice a differing opinion in the past are beginning to be more open.

I am not, for the most part, a conspiracy theorist but for this - yes I am, it would be really interesting to follow the money - Al Gore isnt doing this for love you know. And scientists whose livelihood relies on them saying the "right thing" are definitely not going to rock the boat.

Sadly this has become a religion - the ultimate goal of which is world government and whilst some may think that is not a bad idea I have absolutely no wish to be governed by anything even remotely resembling the UN (Suppose you have checked the Copenahagen agreement that our venerable PM proposes to sign all in the name of saving the planet - world government and socialism by stealth).

Re: Global warming
 

This all feels very religious.

Re: Global warming
 

I've often said this in the past. The problem with this debate is that, irrespective of the science, the 'believers' have taken the moral high ground, and are quick to shoot down any form of debate or argument, in much the same way as religious people do, making the 'non-believers' out to be something akin to holocaust deniers.

The causes of climate change aren't something that can be easily supported or debunked like Holocaust denial - Lots of painfully close examination is needed, which must be transparent and openly critical of itself. The models used must be qualified and checked to make sure that they are making accurate predictions.

The recent revelations at the CRU demonstrate anything but transparency and good scientific technique.

At the moment, I see enough holes in both sides arguments, so I remain a steadfast Climate Change agnostic - awaiting something that will sway me in one direction or the other.


S

Re: Global warming
 

Some good points raised. I don't believe in man made GW but what do I know? My main issues with this 'debate' are:
The advocates of man made GW are being listened to by governments and therefore their agendas are becoming policy.
The scientists saying GW is not man made are not being listened to - although this may be changing.
Many respectable scientists are saying MMGW is real, but equally many others are saying that it is not.
If a scientist debunks the MMGW theory, he is immediately denounced as being in the pay of big business/big polluters.
Nobody seems to question the agendas of the scientists talking up MMGW despite the fact that much (note 'much', not all) of academia has a left-wing, anti-capitalist, anti-west viewpoint - and some have a very hard-left agenda.

Thankfully some politicians and policy makers are waking up and starting to question the MMGW religion. The liberal party is doing the right thing by opposing the ETS - it could seriously harm our economy for no benefit.

Re: Global warming
 

You mean like Bjorn Lomborg? ;)

Re: Global warming
 

He has been in an academic bunfight. He seems like a decent bloke.

Re: Global warming
 

Didn't say he wasn't a nice bloke (although I haven't met him). But having studied Environmental Science I wouldn't be too quick to agree with his theories.

Re: Global warming
 

People said the same about Hitler :sneaky:

Re: Global warming
 

Fair enough. It looks like he has no scientific (climate or environmental) training but ultimately he is just another 'expert' with an opinion.