It should come as no surprise to anybody that the climate change lobby have been caught cooking the books again. I heard on the radio last night that the Met Office have admitted to exaggerating the temperature levels over the past decade. Slowly but surely the global warming scare is being exposed for what it is…a scam kept going by scientists greedy for more prestige and research grants on the one hand and by gullible lefties (the sort of people who make up most of the contributors to this site) who suspend all their critical faculties when confronted by supposed ’scientific facts’.
No earthquake stuff? Predictably shameful.
When I watched a tv report this morning about a child having her hand amputated without sedation I felt thoroughly ashamed about moaning about my cold and sore throat.
Nothing new here: some projections about the rate of melting of Himalayan glaciers may have been based on speculation. (Aren’t ALL such projections speculation?) The observation that Himalayan glaciers are in fact melting isn’t questioned (just the rate).
No actual data is presented; just attacks on the people warning about global warming. Classic behaviour by denialists in any field.
Comments about the University of East Anglia are droned out yet again as evidence for the view that global warming is a conspiracy to get reserach funds. As usual no direct evidence is presented to support this view, nor do they name any of the other institutions which must be involved in this conspiricy.
There is some evidence, by the way, that climate change scepticism is being funded by the energy industry. (Try Googling it.) This would make the Express the stooge of the fossil fuel industry.
I hate being confronted by supposed scientific facts, especially when they’re being espoused by the vast proportion of the supposed scientific community with their supposed white coats and supposed degrees in ’so-called’ scientific subjects. If science couldn’t save Diana then what good is it to anyone anyway? Sod it, I’m all for going back to casting runes.
The story’s great.
“It was also revealed that the IPCC’s controversial chairman, Dr Rajendra Pachauri, described as “the world’s top climate scientist”, is a former railway engineer with a PhD in economics and no formal climate science qualifications.”
That’s bad. The IPCC really should not be using unqualified sources. The Express then goes on to quote “Climate scientist Peter Taylor”, who, you don’t need to be told, isn’t a climate scientist: http://www.clairviewbooks.com/pages/viewauthor.php?id_in=29
Pot. Kettle.
Talking of which, didn’t they cite the undoubted reason and experience, built up over years, maybe even decades of being a Butlins Redcoat and presenting kids’ maths programmes, as anti-CC evidence from Johnny Ball, aka “TV’s Mr Science”?
The climate change denialists are being funded buy the oil companies, it is no surprise that dirty little rags like the mail and express are pushing the agenda with the money of Exxon and Shell behind them.
If we screw up the climate sufficiently to dump a lot of melt-water into the north Atlantic (you know, like we’re doing at an alarming rate as the glaciers of Greenland are disappearing) the desalination of the waters may well lead to the slowing or stopping of the Atlantic conveyor (ie the Gulf Stream).
In which case we get the worst of all worlds.
A wrecked climate (wetter and more stormy – energetic – in the summer) but overall a cold climate just like similar latitudes in Canada thanks to the removal of the gulf stream.
It is funny seeing these creeps whining about IPCC scientists not all being climate scientists.
Almost to a man the denail side are not climate scientists (and in fact are often aging guys from a different field speaking on behalf of a petro-chemical company – can you say ‘topping up the pension’?)
The Express – giving voice to the cranks. A couple of comments left underneath:
“As for the WWF World Wildlife Fund, I thought that it was a front organisation for MI6.”
“So the IPCC was set up…. the individuals involved, starting from the top, are now seen to be utterly untrustworthy to the point of criminality.”
Shouldn’t it be “TV’s Amanda shows Britain’s got breasts”? That seems to be the point of the photo, really.
It should come as no surprise to anybody that the climate change lobby have been caught cooking the books again. I heard on the radio last night that the Met Office have admitted to exaggerating the temperature levels over the past decade. Slowly but surely the global warming scare is being exposed for what it is…a scam kept going by scientists greedy for more prestige and research grants on the one hand and by gullible lefties (the sort of people who make up most of the contributors to this site) who suspend all their critical faculties when confronted by supposed ’scientific facts’.
No earthquake stuff? Predictably shameful.
When I watched a tv report this morning about a child having her hand amputated without sedation I felt thoroughly ashamed about moaning about my cold and sore throat.
Nothing new here: some projections about the rate of melting of Himalayan glaciers may have been based on speculation. (Aren’t ALL such projections speculation?) The observation that Himalayan glaciers are in fact melting isn’t questioned (just the rate).
No actual data is presented; just attacks on the people warning about global warming. Classic behaviour by denialists in any field.
Comments about the University of East Anglia are droned out yet again as evidence for the view that global warming is a conspiracy to get reserach funds. As usual no direct evidence is presented to support this view, nor do they name any of the other institutions which must be involved in this conspiricy.
There is some evidence, by the way, that climate change scepticism is being funded by the energy industry. (Try Googling it.) This would make the Express the stooge of the fossil fuel industry.
Somewhat unnerving (cute? Get outta here) rollerskating babies advert is front page news? Oh for goodness’ sake.
I hate being confronted by supposed scientific facts, especially when they’re being espoused by the vast proportion of the supposed scientific community with their supposed white coats and supposed degrees in ’so-called’ scientific subjects. If science couldn’t save Diana then what good is it to anyone anyway? Sod it, I’m all for going back to casting runes.
britain’s got talent? more like amanda’s got botox.
The story’s great.
“It was also revealed that the IPCC’s controversial chairman, Dr Rajendra Pachauri, described as “the world’s top climate scientist”, is a former railway engineer with a PhD in economics and no formal climate science qualifications.”
That’s bad. The IPCC really should not be using unqualified sources. The Express then goes on to quote “Climate scientist Peter Taylor”, who, you don’t need to be told, isn’t a climate scientist: http://www.clairviewbooks.com/pages/viewauthor.php?id_in=29
Pot. Kettle.
Talking of which, didn’t they cite the undoubted reason and experience, built up over years, maybe even decades of being a Butlins Redcoat and presenting kids’ maths programmes, as anti-CC evidence from Johnny Ball, aka “TV’s Mr Science”?
The climate change denialists are being funded buy the oil companies, it is no surprise that dirty little rags like the mail and express are pushing the agenda with the money of Exxon and Shell behind them.
Eventually, Britain will be warm enough such that the DE will be able to literally cherry pick.
Unfortunately that’s not necessarily so NJH.
If we screw up the climate sufficiently to dump a lot of melt-water into the north Atlantic (you know, like we’re doing at an alarming rate as the glaciers of Greenland are disappearing) the desalination of the waters may well lead to the slowing or stopping of the Atlantic conveyor (ie the Gulf Stream).
In which case we get the worst of all worlds.
A wrecked climate (wetter and more stormy – energetic – in the summer) but overall a cold climate just like similar latitudes in Canada thanks to the removal of the gulf stream.
It is funny seeing these creeps whining about IPCC scientists not all being climate scientists.
Almost to a man the denail side are not climate scientists (and in fact are often aging guys from a different field speaking on behalf of a petro-chemical company – can you say ‘topping up the pension’?)
“Unfortunately that’s not necessarily so NJH.”
I know that, but the main point is that the DE cherry-pick their evidence to fit their ownpreconceptions.