Monday
Aug112014
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill The Eagle crash landed
Aug 11, 2014 Climate: WG2 Labour I have an article up at the Spectator Coffee House blog about Labour's Maria Eagle.
Aug 11, 2014 Climate: WG2 Labour 
Buy
Books
Click images for more details
Currently discussing
-
Dec 20 - julie
on
Established Fiction Ghostwriters Contribution To Fiction Writing -
Dec 6 - sexdollpartner
on
Established Fiction Ghostwriters Contribution To Fiction Writing
Links
A few sites I've stumbled across recently....
-
Science blogs
-
Political blogs
-
Other blogs
Subscribe
Copyright © 2006-2013, Bishop Hill All rights reserved.
Reader Comments (17)
An excellent riposte by our host.
The really bad news is that there are Eagle twins, both MPs and guess what they have degrees in from Oxford University. Yes, just what the country needs, both are PPEs.
Unfortunately Maria Eagle has made very silly statements about AGW in the past and has attacked Owen Patterson many times. She clearly is incapable of understanding any of the climate debate and like many zealots, she just shoots from the hip. It is difficult to understand why they simply do not use their brains!
Yet another pawn for Uncle Putin to manipulate.
Short and to the point. Very good.
Another shadow cabinet minister, another post-op personality bypass patient.
We've all lost count on here [blog], referencing stupid inanities uttered by men and women who really should make some effort to know better but either because they chose not to or that, they are simply not capable of imbibing and then comprehending the necessary information. With a PPE under her belt, I'm not at all sure which category Maria Eagle falls into, lets be charitable and say, a bit of both.
Which to say the least is rather vexing, because let's face it, the probability is Maria Eagle is more than likely our prospective minister for energy and climate sorcery. Then, only God will be able to help us, alas because the loonies will be back in charge of the asylum.
"I think that this is the biggest challenge facing the world today."
Personally I think the biggest danger facing the world today is Fundamentalist Islam.
"Eagle", "wind-turbine". What could possibly go wrong?
The biggest challenge Maria Eagle faced was what bathroom fittings would best suite her new bathroom tiles in her first home that she switched designation for her second home in London.
Some MP opens their gob on Climate Change , worst gloom disaster blah blah the usual etc etc
Some evil Climate Change Denier looks that MP expenses scandal up on google.blah blah the usual etc etc
Poor old Angie she tried to keep her expenses claims secret from the public but not from Wilkipedia..
Do a deal with Angie we all promise to cut our Carbon Footprint if we can all have a three and a half grand freebie from the mug taxpayer for a new bathroom.each Wicks Homebase and B and Q are doing some good offers at the moment
That '97% of scientists' soundbite is really useful for politicians isn't it
particularly when they can tack on any bit if scaremongering, becayse nobody ever checks sources...
Maria Eagle
‘The stability of our climate system provides the basic underpinning for all human life and animal life and plant life… Small shifts in global temperature will cause massive impacts for millions of people. This isn’t speculation or the sci-fi musings of an imaginative, bestselling author. It is solid, established scientific fact, accepted by 97% of the scientists who study our climate systems.’
Hopefully scientistd eill csll her out on this . Publicly. Not just tweets or the odd comment
Cook and Leeabdowdky have been pushing using the 'consensus' messaging to influence the public (& politicians) very hard
"Hopefully scientistd eill csll her out on this . Publicly. Not just tweets or the odd comment"
Remember Barry, to put left hand fingers on right part of key pad!
;^)
She has not written that speech herself. She is just not capable of so doing. Therfore, someone else must have done it. Perhaps her hosts ?
One commentator at the Spectator web site made an interesting point. Windmills have traditionally been used in the Netherlands to pump water away and reduce flood risk. I remember in the 1960s seeing small windmills on farms in Ayrshire in southwest Scotland doing the same thing but I have not noticed any recently when driving through Somerset where they would be even more useful.
Monster wind turbines of the kind used for intermittent generation of electricity are not necessary. Small, relatively unobtrusive ones can do useful work in helping to keep fields drained and it does not matter if they only work intermittently.
Why aren't Greens in favour of using wind power for what it is suitable for?
The Spectator really ought to consider hiding the comments under its blog articles from the casual reader. After skimming through some of the thoroughly unreconstructed alarmism in the comments under your article, I found myself wondering what has happened to the Spectator's reputation as a mag for the intelligent reader.
However, I found "your shamefull article" (sic) itself worth the reading - even given that Someone Like Her addressing An Organisation Like Them was never destined to turn out well. Thanks.
@Roy "Why aren't Greens in favour of using wind power for what it is suitable for?"
Because that would obstruct their plan for keeping the Moors and Levels in a saturated state during the winter for the benefit of migrating wading birds from N Europe. The infrastructure, managed by the drainage boards, is all in place - but the EA policy is not to use it. When the stuff hits the fan the high level carrier rivers Parret and Tone - which are embanked above the flood plain - can't shift the volume required because the EA deliberately have allowed them to silt up. There is also the pesky lack of a tidal barrier at Bridgwater - twice a day tidal flows back up as far as Langport. It's a FUBAR situation presided over by the EA, aided and abetted by NE and RSPB.
There's a very angry and abusive warmist in the comments of both that article and the Independent one which is the subject of the next BH post. Looks like the same person. Why are so many warmists so deeply unpleasant?
It's quite counterproductive; I have seen several comments in the past from people, including scientists, who decided to look closer at the CAGW scam because its defenders were so downright abusive it was obvious something wasn't right.
Steve C: "The Spectator really ought to consider hiding the comments under its blog articles from the casual reader. After skimming through some of the thoroughly unreconstructed alarmism in the comments under your article, I found myself wondering what has happened to the Spectator's reputation as a mag for the intelligent reader."
Very true and not just about this article. Whenever I am vaguely tempted to subscribe to The Spectator, I read some of the comments - there is a hard core of regular commentators - and conclude I simply would not wish to be in their company.
"She is actually focusing on two standard Labour party themes: spending cuts, particularly in the area of flood defence, and evil Conservatives, in particular Owen Paterson."
Speaking as a lefty sceptic...
At least the first of those issues is worthy of consideration.
Especially with much new housing being and having been built on flood plains.
Having read the full text of Maria's speech, it is an absolute gem of it's type. She re-hashes the same old tired arguments that we all know and love, uses the 'd-' word to tar her political opponents and clearly hasn't actually taken a single glance at any actual data or evidence herself.
In a way it makes me glad, as if the Alarmists just keep on reeling off the same old arguments, the public will continue to ignore them in droves.
I've written a blog post on the contents of the speech here:
http://jonathanabbott99.wordpress.com/2014/08/13/rehashed-alarmism/