I will shortly be taking a break - from this sub-forum particularly. I will still read the threads occasionally but only comment or post on ‘rational’ ideas.

Now that the cheers have subsided from those posters who I have continually exposed as ‘crackpots’, I will say why.

I have never considered the quality of debate here very good. On the one hand there have been a few individuals, like myself, who have tried to post factual, scientific information to back up our beliefs and then there are those who have tried to avoid the consensus truth of GW for ‘political’ or 'conspiratorial' dogma.

I have stated several times that all of the ‘real’ evidence is in favour of Anthropogenic reasons for the latest phase of GW. However, the contrarians keep quoting debunked mantras which echo around the right-wing blogosphere like a dying thunderclap.

The debate on the whether there is GW now and it’s causes is over – has been for a decade. There is a simple reason why the vast worldwide consensus of scientists, politicians, and ordinary people believe in AGW – that is because it is the recognised truth.
Even the US libertarians who initially attacked the basic ideas have now conceded that GW is Real and caused by Mankind’s activities. There are just a few residual opponents who have been left behind by the tide of human thought.

I found this about ‘deniers’ arguments a long time ago :-

The atmosphere isn’t warming,
And if it is then it’s due to natural variation,
And even if it is not due to natural variation then the amount of warming is insignificant,
And if it becomes significant then the benefits will outweigh the problems,
And even if they don’t then Technology will come to the resecue,
And even if it doesn’t, we shouldn’t wreck the economy when many parts of the science are uncertain.

I will leave you with those thoughts
[Rep]

Sorry to see you go.

I rarely visit this sub forum as my requests, though few, for scientific proof to support the contrarian view were never properly answered. At one time all I was offered as 'proof' was a poorly produced ad hominem spoof by a couple of American illusionists. I was called enviro-fascist for supporting the actions of local government officials in seeking to enforce the rules passed by democratically elected councillors and MPs; even though I don't agree with all of the rules the attacks on the 'poor bl@@dy infantry' showed a paucity of intellect of monumental precautions. I have enough going on in my life to not want to be involved in pointless name calling and I don't want to waste my time watching bad science.

Keep in touch.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Clippo:
There is a simple reason why the vast worldwide consensus of scientists, politicians, and ordinary people believe in AGW – that is because it is the recognised truth.

But that's the point, isn't it? It is the 'recognised' truth. It isn't a truth that individuals have all worked out by themselves. It isn't a truth that people recognised that they even needed.

It's a truth that has been foisted upon them by a political elite. It may well actually be a truth, but it is 'recognised' as such because of the enormous machine behind it. So I do not agree that their is a vast worldwide consensus of understanding, just a majority of believe in what they are told.

I would be far warmer (!) to the way that AGW is sowed, propogated and harvested if the government did some real action instead of simple taxation. The current methology seems to be aimed at subjugating a population through fear and poverty, whislt low cost airlines are encouraged, immigration is encouraged, more house building is encouraged, less money is spent on rail transport and so on.

AGW may or may not turn out to be the truth. But if it is, then the global elite must be laughing their socks off at managing to convince and tax and subjugate the populace.
[Rep]

MMGW will be shown to be a definate lie in the future.

Those who are paid to peddle its lies will be revealed at the same time.

Shame on them all.
[Rep]

Well said Hartlepool !

Yes forget that humans count for 3% of c02 emisions, the Club Of Rome admissions and the fact that the IPCC faked it's "scientific" findings, and there are numerous other expert scientists which do not agree.

That's right - c02 is an evil pollutant, not a natural gas that allows plants to grow.

Ironic how Clippo says "recognized" truth and not truth and how he uses "ordinary people" to suggest that if you question it, then you are not ordinary (maybe a 'denier' like he has referred to ?)

And of course politicians can be trusted to tell the truth, as can the scientists, some of whom have openly admitted they summarized their findings to match what was required of them to secure the funding they received.

Shame Clippo feels that he needs to announce a break to try to engage some kind of sympathy.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by youcanhandlethetruth:
Yes forget that humans count for 3% of c02 emisions,

So?

Originally Posted by youcanhandlethetruth:
the Club Of Rome admissions and the fact that the IPCC faked it's "scientific" findings

Your logic was totally flawed the last time you posted something about the COR. Got something new?

Originally Posted by youcanhandlethetruth:
That's right - c02 is an evil pollutant, not a natural gas that allows plants to grow.

Water is vital to plants and humans. The residents of Boscastle might just have a slightly different perspective on it than many others.

Originally Posted by youcanhandlethetruth:
as can the scientists, some of whom have openly admitted they summarized their findings to match what was required of them to secure the funding they received.

If you read the IPCC report, (I mean the report itself, not the executive summary), particularly the chapters on observations you'll see that it would have needed collusion on a significant scale to falsify the results. I suppose that's possible.

For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not Clippo.
And, for the further avoidance of doubt, I don't know nor have I ever claimed to know if AGW is taking place, nor am I a fan of Al Gore, the politician turned film maker.

Hopefully, that will help you to avoid making inaccurate and unfounded assumptions about me.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Besoeker:
So?

So you don't ever hear that quoted in the mainstream media.

Originally Posted by Besoeker:
Your logic was totally flawed the last time you posted something about the COR.

You mean it was flawed according to your totally misaligned conclusion(and because you say so of course)
What bit of "made up" or "the enemy then is humanity itself" did I not understand ?

Originally Posted by Besoeker:
Got something new?

No - still waiting waiting for an explanation on that one.

Originally Posted by Besoeker:
Water is vital to plants and humans. The residents of Boscastle might just have a slightly different perspective on it than many others.

Don't understand what you mean there.

Originally Posted by Besoeker:
If you read the IPCC report, (I mean the report itself, not the executive summary), particularly the chapters on observations you'll see that it would have needed collusion on a significant scale to falsify the results. I suppose that's possible.

That's what a lot of people say about 9/11 too.

Mankind can split the atom and put a man on the moon, but isn't capable of building self serving networks like e.g. the EU and the IPCC in conjunction with the media to deceive the public ?
Yeah right - totally impossible.

Originally Posted by Besoeker:
For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not Clippo.

Sorry Clippo. :-)

Originally Posted by Besoeker:
And, for the further avoidance of doubt, I don't know nor have I ever claimed to know if AGW is taking place, nor am I a fan of Al Gore, the politician turned film maker.

Sure - you don't support the global warming swindle at all.
You just do nothing else on this forum except try to totally discredit the doubters, sorry "deniers".

Originally Posted by Besoeker:
Hopefully, that will help you to avoid making inaccurate and unfounded assumptions about me.

I don't think it's a case of "assuming", I only need to examine your track record (a bit like the IPCC ironically) :-)
[Rep]

What Clippo does or does not do as regards participation on this forum is a matter for him.

He says the debate is over, incorrect the debate is reopened reguarly every time people suspect there is an economic cost to them they adopt amore sceptical stance.

One slight correction also needs to be made, Al Gore has been described on this thread as a politician turned film maker, he is in fact a failed politician and film maker.
[Rep]

And puppet. Like all the prominent politicians.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by youcanhandlethetruth:
So you don't ever hear that quoted in the mainstream media.

And you don't often hear in the media that hydrocyanic acid at about 0.0001% of body weight is lethal. Context matters.

Originally Posted by youcanhandlethetruth:
You mean it was flawed according to your totally misaligned conclusion(and because you say so of course)
What bit of "made up" or "the enemy then is humanity itself" did I not understand ?

Actually, the comment about "made up" was your take. At point your post was fatally flawed.

A little reminder of your basis for claiming clear proof that global warming is a complete hoax:
"In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself."
Human intervention, they said, is the cause.
It's that simple. No further explanation is required.

Originally Posted by youcanhandlethetruth:
Don't understand what you mean there.

I apologise if it was too obscure. You remember Boscastle being in the news? We need water to live. Too much of it isn't desirable. Context matters.

Originally Posted by youcanhandlethetruth:
the EU and the IPCC in conjunction with the media to deceive the public ?
Yeah right - totally impossible.

I didn't say it was impossible. Don't misrepresent my posts.

Originally Posted by youcanhandlethetruth:
I don't think it's a case of "assuming", I only need to examine your track record

Finegood. Examine away and post anything anything I have said that factually contradicts my statement. Anything at all.
If you do find factual contradiction, I will apologise and/or retract as appropriate.
[Rep]