Re: Ch 4 - 'The Great Global Warming Swindle'

On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 18:13:37 +0000, Scott <blackhole@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Uno-Hoo! wrote:
"Scott" <blackhole@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:esv0rq$neh$1$8302bc10@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Mark Horton wrote:
Scott wrote:

Mark Horton wrote:

Uno-Hoo! wrote:

Anyone watch the Channel 4 prog last night on global warming?

By the time I had finished watching it, I was furious that the public
(and not just in this country) are being completely and utterly
hoodwinked by this nonsense about man-made global warming.

The recent IPCC report has been disowned by a large number of real
climatology experts who are angry that their names are still at the
bottom of this report that they consider to be thoroughly bad science.

The program made it absolutely and unequivocally clear that climate
change has *nothing* to do with man produced CO2 - but everything to
do with the sun's activity.

When there is high sunspot activity - the earth's temperature goes up.
As the earth's temperature goes up - so do CO2 levels (particularly
from the warmer oceans). It is true that CO2 levels mirror
temperature changes - but those CO2 levels *follow* temperature
changes (by some 800 years!!!) and therefore *cannot* be the cause of
the temp. changes.

Just *how* can world governments get away with spinning these massive
lies about climate change? It's appalling.

Uno-Hoo!


The programme confirmed a lot of my suspicions about the global warming
theory.

I personally think that theory is espoused as an excuse to ration
dwindling supplies of fossil fuels on a gradual basis.

What better way to ration something, than to tax it out of the price
range of ordinary people?

Mark


Cui bono?
Various governments for a start. More resources are kept for essential
use, a more static population is easier to keep track of, as is one that
relies on public transport. The public does not initially realise
rationing is in place, therefore disquiet is reduced.

Mark
You think that policy is a vote winner?

Yes - if the politicians can convince enough gullible punters to accept the
guff that 'unless we take drastic action now we are all doomed' ! It is
clear from some of the posts on this thread that they've managed to convince
many already!

Uno-Hoo!



OK. So you're going to be voting for any government that removes peoples cars,
stops cheap flights etc.

It is not the government which has convinced me, it is the scientific evidence.
Indeed this program only added to that conviction, because, (unlike the sheeple
who watched it), it prompted me to look at the skeptic evidence. Anyone who
does that can't fail to be convinced that the skeptic case is bankrupt (the
evidence presented by the program has been discussed at length in the
scientific literature).

Yes, let's all panic.
The scientists have never been wrong before.
Here's a new dodge the Chancellor might like to consider.
Tax the athletes at the Olympics. After all, every exhalation
increases the CO2 levels and athletes puff more than most.

I bet that if you lot lived in the 50s you would have been first in
line for the back yard nuclear shelters.

Man is too puny to seriously affect global warming and too arrogant to
ever admit it.

--
Madden
.

Loading