.. Debate climate change on Newsnight:
1. Some scientists think think the whole human spieces is at risk & want us to change how we live.
2. Other scientists disagree and say very little needs to change.
Now, if we can't resolve this scientific dispute one way or another, given the proposition in 1, what sort of nihlist errs on the side of 2?
6 Comments:
Let's do nothing and all go down in a heap. More exciting.
Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven.
We are also at risk of loss of freedom and power grab greenwashed by the the usual suppsosed emergency.
This is another false dichotomy. There is a third way. Mu. Warming is a real problem if exaggerated for effect, adapting and surviving is a better option than doing a Canute, there are better ways to spend our money.
There are fantastic reasons to cut carbon and fuel in general and waste anyway. We don't need the bogey man of melt down. We need a technology dash to work round the effects of warming. And to break out of the carbon loop, including more pressingly for geopolitical reasons.
(Writes a one time NERC trained glaciologist)
I do not accept pronouncements on physical scientific matters from Lord Lawson, since I do not believe he has adequate (or indeed any) authority on the subject.
That there is a doubt cannot be denied but it seems scientific opinion is weighted to climate change occurring and that it may well be anthropogenic.
It's an outrageous gamble not to try counter-measures, as you imply.
Indeed, 'another false dichotomy'.
Having stumbled on your blog, Sir, I cannot understand why others put you on their blog roll. For a start you are quite wrong about the media overdoing Browns troubles - he's had to call an exraordinary meeting of the PLP to try, to try, to quell a rebellion.
But I digress ...
Yeah lets ignore the reality and follow the hype 'just to be on the safe side'.
Dope.
Meantime money which could be spent NOW on real lifesaving schemes in the real world gets sent down the tubes in the name of the new religion, the Godsend of a lever thats used by every loony activist to twist us to their will.
Check put the deaths due to malaria which could have been saved by using DDT, another envronmental scare story gone sour.
And thats just the start - just how do we help those who really need help NOW if we impoverish ourselves in a hopeless attempt to stop something which is not actually happening?
There has been no warming over the last 10 years, 'its the SUN stupid'.
Lawson knows how to take advice who to go to and who to listen to. He is not going to be taken in by a scam - like you.
Go find out about Maurice Strong and you will see how the new religion was born.
Thanks Trevor.
When Brown's poll ratings reach the level John Major's did then I'll accept there's no media effect in play here. Until then I'll give you the benefit of the doubt...
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home